Most Complementary foods were processed from cereals in most developing countries especially in Ethiopia. Although these staple cereals had good nutrients, they needed different approaches on improvement of formulations and processing methods for using low cost and locally available cereals. The aim of this study was to assess proximate and processing methods of complementary foods available in Bahir dar. This study focused on laboratory analysis on randomly collected products from market with different brand and comparing the results each other and with standards. Ten products from different processors were subjected to laboratory analysis of proximate and mineral value with triplicates. Questioner assessments also had done using semi-structured questions conducting to processors. Even though ingredients labeled in packaging material were almost similar, the results indicated that significant differences was observed between products and also compared to standards.The protein content of complementary flour was ranged from 6.06±0.02 to 12.81±0.12% with significant difference (p ≤ 0.005). Ash contents of the results ranged from3.51±0.01 to 1.59±0.02%, which showed a significant difference between products and also with standards. According to codex standard, fiber contents of products were greater. Total starch for all products ranged from 53.19±0.58 to 68.09±1.895%. Results of energy showed 249.93±2.19kcal and 317.70±1.60kcal lower and higher values respectively with significat difference between products and compared to standards the results were greater than the accepted value (299 kcal). This result showed effect of pyhtate contents on atinutritonal effect of iron was high that is all products had greater value than accepted values. In phytate to zinc antinutritional effects, the results were lower than maximum limit that indicate all products had no atinutritional effects on zinc. A result of questionnaire data showed that about 5 of 10 respondents were >40 years old and only 1 respondent was 20-30 year old. Most of the respondents were illiterate and only some could read and write. About processing method effects most were not aware. Two respondents from ten respondents used only roasting processing method for some raw materials and 3 used germinating method of processing. Two processors were process complementary foods without additional methods of processing. The raw materials for processing complementary foods, 8 respondents used a variety of cereals, legumes and, oil seeds as compared to 2respondents used only cereals. Most products showed variation from the standards and showed a lack of knowledge of processing methods as well as selection and proportionate raw materials.