24 cans compared

Rawz vs Tiki Cat

The typical Tiki Cat can gets 0% of its calories from carbohydrate, against 9.3% for Rawz. Rawz has 11 of 14 recipes under the 10% low-carb line; Tiki Cat has 10 of 10. Below, every number is worked out the same way from each can’s label.

Rawz

Tiki Cat

Rawz vs Tiki Cat at a glance

Typical values are the middle recipe of each brand. Shares are of calories, so textures compare fairly. Marked cells show the better value where the gap is meaningful.

	Rawz	Tiki Cat
Cans we compare	14	10
Typical carbs, % of calories	9.3%	0%
Carb range	1.7–14.3%	0–4.6%
Recipes under 10% carbs	11 of 14	10 of 10
Typical protein, % of calories	45%	69%
Typical fat, % of calories	49%	31%
Calories per ounce	26	25
Calories per can	110–188	59–77
Recipes with published phosphorus	14 of 14	0 of 10
Typical phosphorus, mg per 100 kcal	252 mg	—
Confirmed for kittens	7 of 14	7 of 10
Chicken-free recipes	8 of 14	4 of 10
Fish-free recipes	6 of 14	4 of 10
Textures	Pâté, Shreds in broth	Shreds in broth, Flaked, Chunks in gravy, Pâté

Lowest-carb can from each brand

The recipe with the smallest share of calories from carbohydrate on each side, leaving out toppers meant for supplemental feeding.

Put these two side by side

Rawz5.5 oz

Chicken & Chicken Liver Pâté

Pâté · 188 kcal per can

Carbs: 1.7%
Protein: 33%
Phosphorus: 248mg

Protein 33%Fat 65%Carbs 2%

Low carbNo fish

Tiki Cat2.8 oz

Chicken Recipe in Broth

Shreds in broth · 66 kcal per can

Carbs: 0%
Protein: 69%
Phosphorus: not listed

Protein 69%Fat 31%Carbs 0%

Low carbHigh protein

Same texture, head to head

For each texture both brands make, the lowest-carb recipe from each.

Texture	Rawz	Tiki Cat
Pâté	Chicken & Chicken Liver Pâté1.7% carbs · 33% protein · 188 kcal	Pate+ Chicken Recipe in Chicken Broth0% carbs · 69% protein · 72 kcal
Shreds in broth	Shredded Chicken9.3% carbs · 68% protein · 116 kcal	Chicken Recipe in Broth0% carbs · 69% protein · 66 kcal

Which to choose, by what your cat needs

For a diabetic or overweight cat

Tiki Cat is the lower-carb line overall. Its lowest-carb recipe is Chicken Recipe in Broth at 0% of calories; Rawz’s is Chicken & Chicken Liver Pâté at 1.7%. Both brands have recipes under the 10% line (10 of 10 against 11 of 14), so the right recipe matters more than the brand.

For kidney concerns

Rawz publishes phosphorus for 14 of 14 recipes (typical 252 mg per 100 kcal). Tiki Cat doesn’t publish phosphorus on the pages we checked. Only recipes with a published value can be checked, so start from those and confirm targets with your vet.

For kittens

Rawz has 7 of 14 recipes whose label we could confirm covers growth or all life stages; Tiki Cat has 7 of 10. A missing statement doesn’t mean a can is unsuitable, only that we couldn’t verify it.

For allergies and picky eaters

Chicken-free: Rawz 8 of 14, Tiki Cat 4 of 10. Fish-free: Rawz 6 of 14, Tiki Cat 4 of 10. Textures: Rawz makes pâté, shreds in broth; Tiki Cat makes shreds in broth, flaked, chunks in gravy, pâté.

Questions about Rawz vs Tiki Cat

Is Rawz or Tiki Cat lower in carbs?

The typical Tiki Cat can gets 0% of its calories from carbohydrate, against 9.3% for Rawz. Rawz has 11 of 14 recipes under the 10% low-carb line; Tiki Cat has 10 of 10.

Which has more protein, Rawz or Tiki Cat?

Rawz. Its typical can gets 45% of calories from protein, against 69% for Tiki Cat. Rawz has 6 of 14 recipes over 50% protein calories; Tiki Cat has 10 of 10.

Which is more filling per ounce?

About the same: 26 calories per ounce for Rawz and 25 for Tiki Cat.

Do Rawz and Tiki Cat publish phosphorus?

Rawz publishes phosphorus for 14 of 14 recipes (typical 252 mg per 100 kcal). Tiki Cat doesn’t publish phosphorus on the pages we checked.

Which is better for a diabetic cat, Rawz or Tiki Cat?

Carbs are what matter most, and Tiki Cat has the lower-carb line with 10 of 10 recipes under 10%. The best single choice is a specific recipe, not a brand: Chicken & Chicken Liver Pâté (1.7%) from Rawz or Chicken Recipe in Broth (0%) from Tiki Cat. Change a diabetic cat’s food only with your vet.