Brand Comparison · 2026

Blue Buffalo vs Taste of the Wild

Blue Buffalo (mid-premium kibble marketed on ingredient quality; partial wsava compliance.) and Taste of the Wild (grain-inclusive and grain-free kibble at mid-tier pricing; partial wsava compliance.) compared head-to-head on WSAVA manufacturer-quality criteria, AAFCO substantiation, monthly cost, and which dog each is best for in 2026. Taste of the Wild meets 1 of 5 WSAVA criteria. Taste of the Wild is roughly 25% less than Blue Buffalo.

Quick comparison

Dimension	Blue Buffalo	Taste of the Wild
Parent company	General Mills	Diamond Pet Foods
Category	Boutique dry kibble	Boutique dry kibble
WSAVA criteria met	0 of 5	1 of 5
AAFCO substantiation	Formulation only	Formulation only
Full-time veterinary nutritionist	Partial	No
Credentialed formulator	Partial	Partial
AAFCO feeding trials	No	No
Owns manufacturing plants	No	Yes
Quality control program	Partial	Partial
Typical monthly cost (50 lb dog)	$50 – $90 / month	$40 – $65 / month

General Mills

Blue Buffalo

Mid-premium kibble marketed on ingredient quality; partial WSAVA compliance.

Strengths

Strong consumer-facing ingredient transparency
Wide retail availability and brand recognition
Acquired by General Mills (2018) added scale and QC discipline

Watch-outs

Formulation-only substantiation (no feeding trials)
Does not own all manufacturing — historically uses co-manufacturers
Caught up in past lawsuits over advertising claims

Best for: Owners who prioritize ingredient-list transparency over WSAVA manufacturer-quality criteria.

Avoid if: You specifically want a brand that meets all 5 WSAVA criteria.

Visit Blue Buffalo ↗

Diamond Pet Foods

Taste of the Wild

Grain-inclusive and grain-free kibble at mid-tier pricing; partial WSAVA compliance.

Strengths

Lower price than most premium kibbles
Owned manufacturing through Diamond
Recipes built around novel proteins (bison, salmon, venison)

Watch-outs

Historical contamination recalls (notably 2012 Salmonella)
No board-certified veterinary nutritionist on staff
Grain-free lines implicated in FDA DCM investigation

Best for: Owners drawn to novel protein lineups at moderate prices.

Avoid if: You want full WSAVA compliance or have a dog with cardiac risk factors.

Visit Taste of the Wild ↗

Which is better for your dog?

The right pick depends on your individual dog. Blue Buffalo is the better choice when: Owners who prioritize ingredient-list transparency over WSAVA manufacturer-quality criteria. Taste of the Wild is the better choice when: Owners drawn to novel protein lineups at moderate prices.

On cost, Taste of the Wild is roughly 25% less than Blue Buffalo at the midpoint of typical premium spec for a 50 lb adult dog. On WSAVA manufacturer-quality criteria, Taste of the Wild meets 1 of 5 vs 0 of 5 for Blue Buffalo.

Personalized recommendation

Skip the brand decision — get a food matched to your specific dog.

IntelliBowl's free 60-second quiz ranks 13+ brands (including Blue Buffalo and Taste of the Wild) against your dog's age, breed, weight, activity, allergies, and budget. Free, no signup.

Take the free quiz →

Compare these brands against others

Methodology: WSAVA criteria reflect each brand's publicly documented manufacturer-quality practices as of May 2026, scored against the WSAVA Global Nutrition Committee's 5-question rubric. AAFCO substantiation reflects the dominant method used across the brand's main retail product line. Monthly cost reflects typical US 2026 retail for a 50 lb adult dog at premium spec, before autoship discounts. Recommendations are editorial and not influenced by affiliate relationships. See our recommendation methodology for IntelliBowl's quiz-engine ranking logic.