FeedWise methodology, version 2.0
How FeedWise Scores Dog Food
Every food in FeedWise is scored by the same deterministic 100 point model. The score is generated from verified ingredients, formulation, processing, sourcing, nutritional information and safety data. Brand reputation, company size, advertising and customer star ratings are never inputs, and the public pages read the catalogue’s stored scores.
Four owner-facing evidence areas are not a new formula
Certifications, Ingredients Quality, Transparency and Country of Origin are practical reading lenses. The live algorithm still uses the seven weighted categories below. Documented manufacturing programs and testing are evidence within relevant categories, not independent approval of every listed food. Nutritional adequacy statements, testing evidence and third-party certifications are different claims.
Current model discrepancy to be aware of
The classification function labels 9.0–10.0 “Exceptional”, as the ranges below show, while the engine’s verified-only exceptional evidence gate starts at 9.5. Those thresholds are not identical. This page discloses the mismatch; no scoring formula, stored score or threshold was changed for this explanation.
The simplified carbohydrate description below is also conditional: the live engine does not assume ash. When ash is unpublished, a calculated carbohydrate value stays blank rather than being presented as a verified figure.
Compare highest-rated dog foods in CanadaThe seven categories
Animal Protein Quality Named animal ingredients, organ meats, egg, named animal and marine fats, verified animal ingredient proportion, less any dilution from concentrated plant proteins. | 25 |
Ingredient Quality Every ingredient is placed in a quality tier from A to E and weighted by its position on the label. Artificial colours, added sugars, vague animal ingredients, ingredient splitting and protein isolates all reduce this score. | 20 |
Carbohydrate and Plant Load Disclosed carbohydrate where published, otherwise an estimate calculated as 100 minus protein, fat, moisture, fibre and ash. Source quality, combined pulse load and refined starch fractions are then considered. | 15 |
Processing and Food Integrity Raw and freeze dried score highest, air dried, dehydrated and gently cooked next, then canned, baked and cold pressed, then extruded. Raw handling safety is assessed separately. | 10 |
Transparency and Sourcing Species identification, published sourcing, country of origin, manufacturing location, detailed nutritional analysis, traceability and supplier information. Marketing language does not count. | 10 |
Nutritional Formulation Complete and balanced status for the stated life stage, detailed analysis, qualified formulation expertise, feeding trial validation and disclosed calcium and phosphorus. | 10 |
Safety and Quality Control Batch testing, pathogen testing, supplier verification, lot traceability, nutrient verification, a recognised manufacturing quality program and recall context including corrective action. | 10 |
| Total | 100 |
The public score is the 100 point result divided by ten and rounded to one decimal place. There is only one canonical calculation, so 91 points is always 9.1.
Ingredient tiers
Tier A, Exceptional food ingredients
Named fresh or raw meat, named fish, whole fish, liver, heart, kidney, spleen, egg, named animal fats and named fish oils.
Tier B, High quality supportive ingredients
Pumpkin, carrot, spinach, broccoli, zucchini, berries, appropriate seeds, kelp and other whole food inclusions.
Tier C, Moderate or neutral ingredients
Oats, barley, rice, potato, sweet potato, millet, quinoa and whole pulses in modest amounts.
Tier D, Lower value formulation ingredients
Prominent corn or wheat, pea starch, potato starch, tapioca, flours and other refined carbohydrate fractions.
Tier E, Major formulation concern
Pea protein, potato protein, corn gluten meal, substantial wheat gluten, soy protein concentrate, artificial colours, added sugars and vague animal ingredients.
Ingredient position matters
An ingredient is not rewarded simply for appearing somewhere on a label. Position one carries full weight, position two carries 0.90, position three 0.80, position four 0.70, position five 0.60, positions six to ten 0.40, positions eleven to twenty 0.20 and anything beyond that 0.10. A trace of blueberry at the end of a long kibble panel cannot lift a score.
Pulse load and ingredient splitting
Peas, lentils, chickpeas and beans are never assessed in isolation. FeedWise calculates a combined pulse load across the whole panel. In the same way, peas, pea starch, pea protein and pea fibre are grouped into one pea family, and the same grouping is applied to corn, rice, wheat, potato, soy, lentils and chickpeas. When several fractions of the same core plant appear, the product is flagged for ingredient splitting.
Unknown evidence is not confirmation
FeedWise never invents percentages, sourcing locations, manufacturing practices, feeding trials or testing programs. Where evidence has not been published, the product page says not publicly verified, the missing item is listed openly. Required unknown evidence earns zero and stays in the denominator; optional unknown evidence may leave the denominator, and unknowns can cap a category below its maximum. Confidence is reported as High Confidence, Moderate Confidence or Limited Data. Manufacturers can supply evidence at any time and the score is recalculated from that evidence.
Classification ranges
| 9.0 to 10.0 | Exceptional |
| 8.0 to 8.9 | Excellent |
| 7.0 to 7.9 | Very Good |
| 6.0 to 6.9 | Good |
| 5.0 to 5.9 | Fair |
| 4.0 to 4.9 | Below Average |
| 0.0 to 3.9 | Poor |
What FeedWise never uses
- Customer star ratings and community reviews
- Brand reputation, marketing spend or manufacturer size
- Retailer relationships, affiliate links or paid placement
- Manually entered scores of any kind
Corrections are made to the underlying evidence, never to the score. When evidence changes, the engine recalculates and the change is written to the score history.
Request a Wise correction →Sources primaires
Ces références expliquent les informations figurant sur les étiquettes, l’adéquation nutritionnelle et les contrôles de salubrité. Les pondérations des catégories, les niveaux attribués aux ingrédients et les notes liées à la transformation relèvent de la méthodologie propre à FeedWise.
- Bureau de la concurrence du Canada — Guide sur l’étiquetage et la publicité concernant les aliments pour animaux familiers
Référence canadienne sur les listes d’ingrédients, l’analyse garantie et les indications de qualité nutritive.
- AAFCO — Comprendre les étiquettes (en anglais).
Comment interpréter les déclarations d’adéquation nutritionnelle, les stades de vie, les garanties nutritionnelles et les mentions d’essais alimentaires.
- FDA des États-Unis — Contrôles préventifs pour les aliments destinés aux animaux (en anglais).
Référence sur la maîtrise documentée des dangers, la vérification, le contrôle des fournisseurs et la planification des rappels.
Le guide canadien de 2001 est volontaire. La règle de la FDA s’applique aux installations visées par la réglementation américaine; elle n’est pas une exigence universelle au Canada.
Your next step
Now put FeedWise to work for your dog.
Compare the food you feed against the foods you are considering, see verified scores and Canadian retail prices side by side, and get the full report — no account needed.