The LONG awaited new dog food rating system is finally here!
It has taken months and months of research and data gathering followed by several more months of coding and fine tuning but I’m really delighted with the results.
Based on the most up-to-date nutritional information, the new rating algorithm is able to delve far deeper into the true merits of a dog food, examining factors like bio-appropriateness of ingredients and nutrient quality, bio-availability, balance & synergy better than ever before.
The algorithm now also factors in how the food was processed (extrusion, pasteurisation, baking, cold pressing etc) and how that processing is likely to have affected the nutrients contained within the ingredients.
What you’ll notice:
Nutritional ratings are now given as percentage scores
Every product has been re-analysed with the new algorithm and a new score awarded
The bar for the maximum score has been raised considerably so A LOT of products have come down relative to the maximum
I’ve also been making a few aesthetic changes to the directory and review pages to make them more intuitive and easier to navigate
As always I’d really like to hear your thoughts on any of the changes or on what you think the next changes should be!
It looks good and on initial examination, I see some surprises in the new ratings. I look forward to having a good browse. I see that naturaw doesn’t reach the same high rating as nutriment now! I assume that is due to lack of added healthy ingredients. However for me the eco friendly packaging has to be a consideration. hopefully the veg I add myself adds some of the missing nutrients.
I think this directory is becoming much more known about among dog owners. I hear it mentioned regularly on other websites and forums. And, I was discussing dog food with a member of staff at Pets at Home last week and she was telling me that one of the foods we were discussing has been awarded 3.8. I asked if she was referring to the allaboutdogfood directory, and she said yes.
I have found a fairly local supplier of Nutriment, but my tiny dog only needs 100g of raw per day. Short of investing in an electric saw to portion it out for daily use, I don’t see how I can buy a block of it make it usable. So I continue with Nature’s Menu nuggets, which score well.
Thank you for all of your hard work - it is worth it!
I feed my dog Tribal TLC alongside Butternut Box. Tribal was previously rated at 4.5 (90%) but has dropped significantly to 73%.
I do realise from what David has said that some foods have had their ratings dropped but I’m puzzled by this when other cold pressed foods that use meat meal rather than fresh meat as Tribal does are scoring so highly in comparison (20% higher in some cases).
Also, having a browse through the product pages I’ve come across, as an example, Arden Grange Prestige which is extruded, has a red ingredient (maize) and a low meat content according to the symbols.
Also Natural Dog Food Company Turkey Light which is extruded, has rice as its main ingredient and low meat content.
Yet both rate exactly the same as Tribal under the new rating algorithm.
Paul O’Grady’s Hypoallergenic actually rates higher at 75%, yet is extruded, has low meat content and rice as its first ingredient.
I appreciate that David does an amazing job and this must have been a huge undertaking so I don’t wish to sound critical, I am just genuinely puzzled and unsure if I’m missing something with these ratings?
Apologies for the slow reply Petmum but things here are manic of late. There are a number of factors at play but one of the main ones is the relatively high amount of fish hydrolysate which may be throwing the score out a bit. I’m talking with Tribal about this today so please bear with me.
I like the new scoring too. I have recently started feeding my two dogs CobbyDog Cold Pressed Fish Supper and decided which food to try based on the dog food directory ,and that Cobbydog was highly rated and also made in the UK. I am giving them Cobbydog in the morning and raw in the evening and they are absolutely loving it.
I sometimes feed my nearly-3-year-old 2.75 kg dog Barking Heads wet food pouches. If he has this exclusively, he has less than half of a 300 g pouch per day, it costs me around 80p per day . The directory calculates that it would cost £2.50 per day.
I like this dog food as it doesn’t contain any thickeners at all, and I wouldn’t want people put off it thinking it is more expensive to feed than it is.
Having said this, I am yet to find a 300 g pouch that contains more than 260 g of actual food. I have weighed the contents of many a dog and cat food, and the weight of the pouches themselves is included in the total, and then some.
Just to let you know that, thanks to enlightening info from Tribal, their nutritional ratings have come up considerably.
The biggest factor was the hydrolysed fish. The term hydolysed meat or fish has traditionally been used to identify digest, the not-so-desirable flavour enhancer used in a lot of dry foods. The hydrolysed fish used by Tribal, on the other hand, is quite distinct. Here’s what they had to say:
Fish Hydrolysate. I have attached the specification of the product which we use and a study comparing the protein digestibility of our product [also attached here] versus fishmeal showing that it is more digestible than fishmeal. The specification shows that our fish product is extremely high quality, made from MSC certified Whole Blue Whiting so we’re using the whole fish (rather than offcuts/byproducts) and one specific species of fish so our product will always be consistent. It is hydrolysed using food grade quality digestive enzymes (rather than chemical hydrolysis) and then mill ground, so not subject to the damaging high temperatures that other fishmeals may be subjected to. There is also some early stage research to suggest that fish hydrolysates (or fish protein powder) can also have health benefits. So a far cry from a traditional flavour enhancer.
