A clear view of the evidence
Carefully sourced.
Honestly explained.
Our library currently contains 258 source-checked care profiles. It is a growing library, not a comprehensive clinical resource.
What the profiles contain
We checked published UK registry lifestyle categories and a pet-care guide on 3 October 2026. Each care field links to its source and interpretation notes. Advantages and commitments are editorial considerations linked to their underlying care guidance. Questions are prompts to investigate, not measured breed traits. Categories are broad; sources can differ. Lifespan categories and editorial guide ranges are preserved, not converted into clinical estimates.
How to read the short summaries
Every profile starts with an original editorial overview of the care guidance already cited on that page. These are practical introductions, not personality predictions or new clinical findings. Publisher activity bands remain broad guides; unknowns and crossbreed variability stay visible. The care table and evidence notes provide the detail.
A publisher’s non-shedding category does not establish human allergy tolerance.ACAAI pet-allergy guidance ↗(US clinical education; checked 4 October 2026) provides the context for that caution.
Cavapoo’s “simply the most lovable dog in the world” is a playful editorial favourite. It is an opinion, has no evidence rating and does not affect matching. Individual dogs vary, and the Cavapoo’s sourced care guidance remains below it.
How personalised matching works
Start with your circumstances, or select one to four breeds and assess them against the same answers. The score compares published activity, coat care, size and shedding guidance with your routine and preferences. Set importance from 1 to 5. A 100/100 score means alignment on the assessed care and preference dimensions; it does not establish overall suitability. Behaviour, time alone, children, pets and allergies still require individual assessment.
Each dimension has an editorial alignment from 0 to 100. We multiply it by your importance, add the results and divide by the total importance. Activity and grooming alignment are full when your available band covers the source band. A shortfall reduces activity alignment by one third per category and grooming alignment by one half per category. More available care never reduces alignment, and spare capacity is not rewarded beyond full alignment. “Up to an hour” cannot confirm a shorter routine; that case receives zero confirmed activity alignment until individual needs are checked.
Size uses the ordered source categories: small, small–medium, medium, medium–large, large, extra large. A category inside your chosen group receives full alignment; outside it, each half-step reduces alignment by one fifth. These are editorial category distances, not measured differences in weight or height. An open size preference is excluded from the score. Shedding sources say whether a coat sheds, not how much. For a shedding coat, the three preference levels receive 0, one third or two thirds alignment according to your tolerance; a recorded non-shedding coat receives full preference alignment. Being open to shedding excludes that dimension. This is not an allergy assessment.
Missing facts contribute zero confirmed alignment and stay in the denominator. The displayed unresolved range shows what the index could reach if all missing facts aligned fully. It is not a statistical confidence interval or a compatibility probability. Evidence coverage is the share of your selected score weight with known facts, excluding behavioural priorities. Missing information means more investigation, not that a breed is unsuitable.
Ranking first minimises the combined activity and coat-care shortfall, using the alignment gaps above without preference weights. Unknown care gets the maximum gap for that dimension, so removing evidence cannot improve the order. Only then do weighted alignment, evidence coverage and alphabetical name break ties. Attractive preferences cannot cancel out an unresolved care need. These scoring choices are transparent editorial rules, not a validated predictive model. Commercial arrangements, popularity and availability never affect them.
Optional priorities cover noise, affection, visitors, training, handling, recall, travel, routine, home access, grooming help, life stage, your existing dog, settling and mess. Importance orders your individual-dog checklist; it does not turn an unsupported behaviour rating into evidence. Answers remain in page memory and are not included in shared links.
Further priorities cover sounds at home, encounters on walks, comfort with routine touch and your capacity for behaviour support. Selected answers tailor the individual questions. You can download those questions and the first four care results as a text file on your own device; it contains your answers and is not sent to us. Behavioural research and its limits are explained in behaviour and your life.
What is still missing
Clinical prevalence, comparable survival estimates, detailed behavioural evidence and regional acquisition prices are not yet reviewed in this library. They are not replaced with guesses. Current local availability and dated commonness measures are also unknown here. We will expand the evidence as it is checked; unknowns are never treated as low risk.
Individual dogs matter
Age, health, history, line, training and environment matter. Meet individual dogs and ask a rescue, breeder or qualified professional about your circumstances. Our tools help you research; they do not establish child safety, inter-dog compatibility or allergy tolerance.
How we interpret the care categories
“Up to an hour” does not prove that less than an hour is sufficient. The finder flags a routine below that band for individual discussion. A publisher’s 1–2-hour range can be explored with about an hour available, but that lower endpoint is not a guarantee of enough activity. “More than weekly” grooming stays that broad; it is not converted to a fixed number of sessions.
Registry lifespan thresholds and the Cockapoo publisher’s guide range come without an established study population or method in these pages. We show their original type of guidance rather than ranking dogs by predicted survival. Publisher size categories are retained even when another source might classify a breed differently.
Who checks the content?
The first six care profiles were rechecked against their original pages on 3 October 2026 by the building agent and a separate AI reviewer. The six profiles added afterwards (Border Collie, Staffordshire Bull Terrier, Dachshund, Greyhound, Cavalier King Charles Spaniel and Miniature Schnauzer) were checked the same way the same day, and two coat descriptions the registry page did not support were removed. The remaining registry-listed breeds were added from their Royal Kennel Club lifestyle pages on 3 October 2026; a separate AI reviewer re-fetched every cited page with its own code and found no mismatch in the care categories. Crossbreeds come from a pet-food manufacturer’s breed guides, which are commercial editorial rather than a registry standard; where a guide says size, coat or activity is hard to predict, or its summary and text disagree, we show the detail as unknown rather than guess. These profiles use standard wording generated from those categories and have not had the individual editorial read that the first twelve had. One wording error was corrected: the Golden Retriever source says grooming more than once a week; it does not specify several times. This is model-assisted source review, not independent veterinary review. Named expert-review labels will only appear for material actually reviewed by that expert.
Corrections
Use the feedback button to flag a claim and, if possible, a supporting source. We review suggestions before changing published content.
Illustration
The decorative dog illustrations were generated with AI. They are not breed-identification evidence or portraits of Ruby. Any future photographs need accurate labels and documented rights.