One report that settles the Trump Account question.
Since Trump Account contributions opened in July, one advisor kept hearing the same question from young parents: should we open one for the baby? The clients were not asking what the account is. They were asking whether it beats the custodial account they were about to open anyway. The whole workflow was one ask to Helmsted, in plain words:
“Build a comparison report for families asking about Trump Accounts. Put the same contributions into the same index fund three ways: a custodial account, a Trump Account left as an IRA, and a Trump Account converted to a Roth in the child’s twenties. Show the after-tax value of each at the ages they might withdraw, so a family can see when the Roth conversion makes the Trump Account worth it and when a custodial account is the better choice.”
What came back. One page, and one condition. Helmsted pulled the account rules from IRS Notice 2025-68, held the deposits, the fund, and the return identical across all three wrappers, and tabled the after-tax value at 18, 30, 40, 50, 60, and 65. Converted to a Roth in the twenties and held past 59½, the Trump Account finishes far ahead: $5,104,853 at 65 against $3,976,163 in a custodial account. Touched at any earlier age it is the weakest of the three, because every dollar of growth owes ordinary income tax plus a 10% surcharge; at 40 that costs $128,197 against a custodial account holding the same fund. Left as an IRA with no conversion at all, it is still $70,652 behind the custodial account at 65.
So the advice to every parent: open the account for the $1,000 seed, plan the ten conversion slices across ages 22 to 31 (about $37,761 of tax, roughly $3,800 a year the parents can cover as a gift) if the money is staying put for six decades, and otherwise send real savings to a custodial account in an index fund.
Getting creative with materials with Helmsted
The report went through a few rounds, each one a plain-language ask: mark the 59½ line so the penalty window is visible at a glance, shade the winning figure at each age instead of adding another column, price an early withdrawal at one concrete age, and add the two execution risks a chart cannot show, conversion income landing on the child’s own return and the fact that at 18 the account is theirs. It stayed one page.
Compare, don’t describe. A client rarely asks what a new account is; they ask whether it beats what they were going to do. Put the condition in the headline. “Only wins if it is converted to a Roth and held past 60” tells a parent more than any feature list. Share it across households. When a question lands in every meeting, ask Helmsted to share the answer with every household that has it, rather than rebuilding it each time.
One thing makes all of it work: context. Helmsted needs the savings pattern you keep seeing (how much, how long, and what the money might be for), the fund the family would actually hold, and the tax rate the child is likely to face in their twenties. The more context you give it, the more specific and useful the output becomes.
Also this week
Helmsted has engaged Vanta for continuous security and compliance monitoring and Sensiba, an independent audit firm, to perform our SOC 2 examination. For independent RIAs, trust starts with how client data is protected, and we believe security, privacy, and accountability must be foundational, not added later. The announcement is here.