What Counts as a Low-Fat Dog Treat? Why We Use a 10% Cut-Off

A packet of dog treats says “low fat”. Fair enough. But how low?

If the answer is just “trust us”, the label isn't doing much for the person buying it.

At Bounce & Bella, we use a straightforward rule: when we call a dog treat low fat, we mean it has 10% crude fat or less, as sold. The actual fat percentage matters just as much as our description; it should be easy for you to find. Our Whitefish & Potato Cookies, for example, declare 8.5% fat.[1]

Ten per cent is our standard. It is not an official UK definition of a low-fat dog treat, and we are not claiming that every dog should eat food below that number.

So why set a cut-off at all? Because we think a clear, accountable promise beats a flattering description that nobody has bothered to define.

Why we chose a number

There is no universal UK legal percentage that makes a dog treat “low fat”. Pet-food rules do, however, require nutritional claims to be objective, understandable and substantiated. The FEDIAF pet-food labelling code specifically says that “high” and “low” claims are absolute claims whose stated levels must be declared and supported.[2]

That is a reasonable demand. A company shouldn't get to call something low fat just because it feels like good packaging copy.

We chose 10% as a practical boundary for how we describe our treats. It gives our customers a predictable starting point: at 10% or below, a treat meets our rule; above 10%, it doesn't.

Is a treat at 10.1% suddenly bad while one at 9.9% is good? Of course not. The dividing line is a company classification, not a biological cliff edge. We would rather be open about that than pretend a number was handed down by nutrition science.

A stricter cut-off might suit another company's range or a particular dog's needs. A more generous one would be harder for us to defend as meaningfully “low”. Our choice needs to remain honest against the products we put in the category, not just be repeated in a slogan.

“But 10% sounds arbitrary”

That's the strongest objection, and it's partly right.

There isn't a universally agreed canine-treat threshold that proves 10% is the only sensible answer. That's a fair criticism.

But the absence of a perfect, universal boundary doesn't make every clear standard worthless. The alternative is to leave “low fat” undefined and force owners to guess what each company means.

Our defence of 10% is limited but real: it is a published, testable B&B rule. You can check our declared numbers and challenge us if we use the phrase inconsistently. Transparency makes the claim accountable. It doesn't excuse us from substantiating it.

“Surely the fat percentage can mislead too?”

Yes. This is where the critics have an excellent point.

The fat percentage on a label is normally based on the food as sold, including its water. An 8% fat wet food and an 8% fat dried treat are not equivalent simply because the two labels have the same number. Remove the moisture, or compare grams of fat per 100 calories, and the picture can change dramatically. Veterinary nutritionists recommend calorie-based comparisons for the most meaningful nutritional assessment.[3]

That is not an argument for hiding the crude-fat figure. It is an argument for knowing what it measures.

Our 10% rule is a first filter for our treat claims, not a promise that products of different moisture levels have identical nutritional effects. When comparing a crunchy treat with a soft, moist one, don't stop at the front of the pack. Look at moisture and calorie information, and ask for a more appropriate comparison if fat intake really matters.

Low fat is not the same as low calorie

Another easy trap: you see “low fat” and assume you can hand out more treats.

Not necessarily. Protein and carbohydrates supply energy too. Our Whitefish & Potato Cookies contain 8.5% fat, but they also provide approximately 372 kcal per 100g. The fat claim tells you something specific; it doesn't make the calories vanish.[1]

If weight control is your main concern, count the calories you actually feed. A common veterinary rule of thumb is that treats and other extras should account for no more than around 10% of a dog's daily calorie allowance.[4]

And yes, that is a different 10% from our low-fat threshold. One is about the composition of a treat; the other is about how much of a dog's daily energy comes from treats. Mixing them up is an excellent way to get the wrong answer.

“What if my dog has pancreatitis?”

Then our 10% label must not be your final test.

For dogs recovering from pancreatitis or managing fat-related medical problems, the appropriate diet can depend on their condition, calorie intake and veterinary treatment. Veterinary guidance often assesses fat on a dry-matter or calories basis, not by relying on the as-sold number on a treat packet. Some dogs need much stricter fat management than others.[5]

We know people look for lower-fat treats after being given veterinary dietary advice. We welcome them looking at our clearly declared figures. But a B&B “low fat” label is not a veterinary endorsement, a pancreatitis treatment claim or permission to add the treat to a prescribed diet without checking.

Ask your vet whether that particular treat and serving size fit your dog's plan. That's a more useful answer than pretending one retail label solves a medical question.

So what should you look for?

Start with the number. If a brand says “low fat”, ask what it means and where the fat content is shown. Compare similar sorts of treats, rather than assuming a wet and a dried product are directly comparable. If calories or a medical fat limit matter, get the information in the units that answer your actual question.

Then look at the rest of the recipe. Fat percentage doesn't reveal which animal ingredients were used, whether they're clearly named or what else is in the bag.

Our position is simple: “low fat” should be something a customer can check, not something a manufacturer can wave around. For B&B, the rule is 10% crude fat or less. We expect the declared figure to be easy to find and our 10% rule to apply wherever we make the claim.

That doesn't make 10% a universal law of dog nutrition. It makes it a promise you can hold us to.

No grain. No vague derivatives. Ever.

Every ingredient clearly named.

Peace of mind for you.

Useful next reads

Sources and footnotes

  1. Bounce & Bella, Whitefish & Potato Cookies, live product information, accessed 26 October 2026. Composition: 85% whitefish, 15% potato. Analytical fat 8.5%; approximately 372 kcal/100g. This documents the company's product declaration, not an independent laboratory validation. Source
  2. UK law, Regulation (EC) No 767/2009 as retained and amended, Article 13 (feed claims must be objective, verifiable and substantiated); FEDIAF, Code of Good Labelling Practice for Pet Food (2019), §§5.2.1.4 and 5.3 (high/low claims are absolute and their levels must be declared and substantiated). Neither source establishes 10% as a universal UK dog-treat cut-off. Source · Source
  3. Cummings Veterinary Medical Center at Tufts University, Petfoodology, “What Is Guaranteed about the Guaranteed Analysis?” (2020), and “Pet Food Nutrient Calculator” (2017). Explains as-fed, dry-matter and nutrient-per-calorie comparisons. Source · Source
  4. VCA Animal Hospitals, “Dog Treats”, treating guidance: treats and extras should normally be kept within around 10% of daily calories; the treating allowance is separate from the fat content of a product. Source
  5. VCA Animal Hospitals, “Nutrition and Pancreatic Disease in Dogs”; Purina Institute, “Canine Chronic Pancreatitis”. These address veterinary fat management and why medical diets have different needs and units. Individual veterinary guidance takes precedence over marketing descriptions. Source · Source