Loading...
Full transparency into how we collect data, compute scores, and protect accuracy.
Pawthentic Scores represent the editorial opinion of this platform. They are generated by applying the methodology described on this page to factual data inputs from public and verified sources. Scores are not statements of fact, endorsements, or condemnations. They are analytical tools designed to help consumers make informed decisions about dog breeders. The complete methodology is disclosed below so that any reader can understand how a score was derived and evaluate it independently.
Every breeder receives a 0–100% score built from two halves: what cited standards require and we can check (the three practice pillars below) and what buyers say (customer reviews). Practice points are citation counts — a requirement is worth however many named standards require it. Mentions on a website are not scored.
The three practice pillars divide up the practice half in fixed proportions — Health & Quality 57.1%, Responsible Breeding 14.3%, and Transparency 28.6%. How much that half counts against reviews depends on how much verified data we hold, which is set out under “How the halves are weighted” below.
57.1% of practice
Breeding-stock screening against the parent-club / CHIC panel, plus a verified public OFA record. Health is the heaviest pillar because more cited standards require it (4 base points). Mentions and unverifiable claims are worth 0.
14.3% of practice
Parent-club membership (AKC Breeder of Merit) and, when that breed's Code of Ethics requires them, a return policy and buyer application. COI, result quality, and questionnaire answers are shown and not scored. Base club membership is 1 point.
28.6% of practice
AKC registration evidenced by a link or program badge (2 points from Breeder of Merit and Bred with H.E.A.R.T.). A written contract scores only when that breed's Code of Ethics requires one. Facility photos are display-only.
30–60% of overall
Google Places rating and count (official aggregate) plus Pawthentic-native reviews. SerpAPI text is internal research only and never shown or scored. Testimonials a breeder publishes on their own website are shown but never scored.
The less verified data we hold on a breeder, the more we defer to the people who actually bought a puppy from them:
A breeder with no reviews at all is not run through this blend. Having no Google presence is not evidence of anything, so their overall score is the higher of their practice score and 70%.
We use a source-weighted Bayesian average with a prior of 3.5 stars and a constant of 7. In plain terms: every breeder starts as if they already had 7 reviews averaging 3.5 stars, and real reviews pull the average away from that starting point in proportion to how many there are. One five-star review barely moves the number; forty of them move it a long way. Google Places official rating and count (when present) plus Pawthentic-native reviews move the pillar. Self-published testimonials stay at zero.
“Breed protocol compliance” measures a breeder against the health panel their breed’s parent club recommends. We only score it for the 11 breeds where we have encoded that panel — German Shepherd, Golden Retriever, Labrador Retriever, French Bulldog, English Bulldog, Cavalier King Charles Spaniel, Doberman Pinscher, Great Dane, Bernese Mountain Dog, Rottweiler, and Dachshund. Every other breed, including designer crosses like Cockapoos and Bernedoodles that have no parent club or CHIC protocol to comply with, is scored on its verified clearances and DNA results without a protocol component. We are not going to invent a standard for a cross that does not have one.
A mention earns 0 points. Unverifiable is displayed as “Mentioned — not scored.” Credit requires a public registry record or a documented artifact (URL + excerpt) that passes the published evidence rule.
Each practice point is a cited standard. Breed-specific items (weight 0 below) score only when that breed’s ingested Code of Ethics requires them.
| Requirement | Evidence | Required by | Points |
|---|---|---|---|
| Breeding-stock health screening | Fraction of breeding stock (parents and retired dogs) with the parent-club / CHIC panel completed in a public registry. DNA tests count only when that breed’s CHIC panel lists them. Credit is the measured fraction — 100% of breeding stock, not a lower target. | ofa-chic, akc-breeder-of-merit, akc-bred-with-heart | 3 |
| Health results public in OFA | At least one dog on the roster has a verified public OFA record. A website that mentions “OFA” is a mention, not this requirement. | ofa-chic | 1 |
| AKC registration | Outbound link to akc.org or marketplace.akc.org, or a Breeder of Merit / Bred with H.E.A.R.T. badge image. | akc-breeder-of-merit, akc-bred-with-heart | 2 |
| Breed club membership | Outbound link to the breed’s parent-club domain. | akc-breeder-of-merit | 1 |
| Written sales contract | Link to a contract PDF or page, or a page with three or more contract-term markers (deposit, refund, spay/neuter, return) in one section. | parent-club-coe | 0 |
| Health guarantee with a duration | Guarantee or warranty text that names a duration (for example “2 year” or “lifetime”), captured with the page URL and excerpt. | parent-club-coe | 0 |
| Return or take-back policy | An explicit return, take-back, or rehome sentence on a published page. | parent-club-coe | 0 |
| Buyer screening application | A link to or embedded application form (application/questionnaire href, Google Forms / Jotform / Typeform, or a form with five or more fields). | parent-club-coe | 0 |
| Parent information with records | A page naming at least two dogs, each with a registration number, OFA/CHIC link, or photo. | parent-club-coe | 0 |
| State license verified | ACTIVE license linked to the current state registry snapshot. Absence never expands the denominator. | state-license-law | 1 |
Claiming a profile, connecting a veterinarian, and having records certified add up to at most 6 points on top of the finished score. This bonus is strictly additive and capped: a breeder who has never heard of us scores exactly what they would if the feature did not exist, and every profile itemises which points it earned and why. The Certified Pawthentic badge is judged on the score before this bonus, so no amount of engagement can earn it.
Certified Pawthentic — Breeders whose pre-participation score reaches 75% earn the badge. Strong health and transparency can achieve it even without reviews.
Clinics are scored on a different model from breeders, because the questions are different: a breeder is judged on the dogs they produce, a clinic on the care it delivers. Both numbers are labelled “PawScore”, so here is what the vet one is made of.
We have not finished verifying credentials across the directory, and scoring a clinic near zero on a pillar we simply have not checked would say more about our coverage than about the practice. Credentials therefore start at 5% and ramp to 25% over 90 days, with unverified clinics held near a neutral 55% baseline that fades as verification catches up.
A score standing on one pillar is also held closer to neutral than one standing on four. The spread widens on its own as real data arrives.
Claiming a listing, putting a licensed vet on the account, connecting clients, and certifying records promptly add up to at most 8 points. As with breeders, the bonus is additive and capped, and certification reads the score before it. A clinic reaches Certified Pawthentic at 85% — a higher bar than the breeder threshold, because vet review ratings sit in a much narrower band. Certification also requires evidence about care (accreditation, a board-certified specialist, or a documented service list), so review volume alone cannot produce the badge.
Pawthentic aggregates data from the following sources. Each source is documented with what data is collected, the basis for collection, and how it is used in scoring.
Breeder profiles on Pawthentic are created from publicly available business information. Breeders who operate public websites, maintain social media pages, or list puppies on public marketplaces have made their business information available to the public. Pawthentic aggregates this information into a profile for consumer reference, similar to how Google Business, Yelp, and the Better Business Bureau create business listings.
Profiles that have not been claimed by the breeder are clearly labeled as “Unclaimed.” Breeders can claim their profile at any time to verify their identity, correct inaccuracies, add additional information, and respond to reviews. The claim process requires identity verification and is reviewed by our team.
If you are a breeder and would like to claim your profile, visit your profile page and select “Claim This Profile.” If you believe your profile contains inaccurate information, you may also submit a dispute request.
Pawthentic collects and displays publicly available factual information about dog breeding businesses. This includes business names, locations, contact information, pricing, and health clearance records that breeders and public registries have made available to the general public.
Customer reviews on public breeder profiles come from Google Places (attributed sample + official rating/count) and Pawthentic-native submissions. Each review is attributed to its source. Pawthentic does not alter review text from Google Places. Internal SerpAPI research is not shown on profiles.
Health clearance data from the OFA database is factual public record. OFA publishes clearance results specifically so that consumers and breeders can reference them when making breeding and purchasing decisions.
Photos from breeder websites and social media pages are used to identify the business in the context of consumer commentary and review, consistent with fair use principles for commentary, criticism, and consumer information purposes. Breeders who wish to have specific photos removed may submit a dispute request.
We automatically flag mismatches between what breeders claim and what the data shows. Contradictions are not accusations — they are alerts to consumers that self-reported claims could not be verified against available data.
Scores help you compare breeders, but no score replaces your own checks. These are the most common puppy-scam warning signs we see across listings, marketplaces, and buyer reports.
Pawthentic strives for accuracy, but no data aggregation platform is perfect. Our data may be incomplete, may not reflect recent changes in a breeder's practices, or may contain errors from upstream sources. Scores are computed from the data available to us at the time of calculation and are updated as new data becomes available.
We encourage breeders to claim their profiles and provide verified data to ensure their scores reflect their actual practices. Breeders and consumers who identify factual inaccuracies can request corrections through our formal dispute and correction process. We review all dispute requests and make corrections when warranted by the evidence provided.
Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act
Pawthentic is an interactive computer service that hosts and aggregates third-party content, including customer reviews. Under Section 230 of the CDA, platforms are not liable for content created by third parties. Reviews displayed on Pawthentic are authored by consumers, not by Pawthentic.
Protected Opinion
Pawthentic Scores are editorial opinions derived from a fully disclosed methodology applied to factual data inputs. The methodology is published in its entirety on this page. Opinions based on disclosed facts and transparent methodology are protected expression under the First Amendment.
Good Faith Corrections
Pawthentic maintains a formal dispute and correction process and promptly investigates reported inaccuracies. Breeders can claim profiles, provide additional data, and request corrections at any time.
Search breeders with verified health data, transparent scoring, and real buyer reviews.