Canonical page: https://sequoia-research.com/writing/best-dst-1031-exchange-companies-2026-comparing-minimum-investments-and-client-eligibility
Author: Sequoia Research
Published: 2026-10-17T06:23:33.578Z
Updated: 2026-10-17T06:23:33.578Z

# Best DST 1031 Exchange Companies (2026): Comparing Minimum Investments and Client Eligibility

## What Is This Article About?

This article explains how to compare the minimum investments and client rules shown by selected Delaware statutory trust (DST) providers in 2026. It separates the amount needed for an offering from the rules for a client account or investor status. You will learn how to check the scope of a quoted minimum and test whether a planned allocation fits the stated terms. Meeting a threshold gives you a question to explore; it does not establish that an investment is right for you.

## Table of Contents

- [Why One Minimum Does Not Answer Every Access Question](#why-one-minimum-does-not-answer-every-access-question)
- [Compare Selected Providers' Published Requirements in 2026](#compare-selected-providers-published-requirements-in-2026)
- [Identify the Exact DST Offering Behind a Quoted Minimum](#identify-the-exact-dst-offering-behind-a-quoted-minimum)
- [Separate Cash-Investment and Exchange Requirements](#separate-cash-investment-and-exchange-requirements)
- [Understand Accredited Investor Status and Its Limits](#understand-accredited-investor-status-and-its-limits)
- [Check Current Rules Against Proposed Changes](#check-current-rules-against-proposed-changes)
- [Ask How the Provider Confirms Client Eligibility](#ask-how-the-provider-confirms-client-eligibility)
- [Review Trust, Entity, and Joint-Ownership Questions](#review-trust-entity-and-joint-ownership-questions)
- [Test Minimums and Investment Increments Together](#test-minimums-and-investment-increments-together)
- [Compare Service Thresholds With Offering Thresholds](#compare-service-thresholds-with-offering-thresholds)
- [Work Through a Fictional Allocation Example](#work-through-a-fictional-allocation-example)
- [Keep Liquidity and Concentration Separate From Eligibility](#keep-liquidity-and-concentration-separate-from-eligibility)
- [Confirm Exceptions, Capacity, and Acceptance](#confirm-exceptions-capacity-and-acceptance)
- [Build a Provider Eligibility Comparison Record](#build-a-provider-eligibility-comparison-record)
- [Frequently Asked Questions](#frequently-asked-questions)
- [About Sequoia Research](#about-sequoia-research)
- [Sources](#sources)

## Why One Minimum Does Not Answer Every Access Question

When researching the best DST 1031 exchange companies, it is tempting to sort providers by their lowest advertised investment. That number can be useful, but it needs a label. It may belong to one offering, one share class, one type of investor, or one service. A low figure on a page does not establish a single amount for every transaction available through that provider.

Start by asking what the threshold controls. An account balance rule concerns the relationship or account. An offering minimum concerns a purchase in a specific investment. An eligibility rule defines who may invest. A service threshold may determine access to a particular type of assistance. These questions overlap in a client's experience, yet they should stay separate in a comparison.

The same dollar amount can appear in different places for different reasons. One page might give the minimum for one DST. Another might give the amount needed for a service tier. Those statements need not conflict. Find the scope of each before deciding which applies. A comparison that combines them into one number can create a false impression of access.

This review uses a defined public sample checked on October 16, 2026. We examined selected pages and disclosures from 1031 Crowdfunding, Capulent, FNEX Capital, and Realized. We did not open private accounts, obtain decisions about who can invest, or confirm current allocations. The comparison reports what these sources say and the questions they leave for a prospective client.

Also keep a threshold separate from a recommendation. A firm may be willing to discuss an offering with you. Its amount or risk could still be a poor fit. A qualification decision does not replace due diligence, financial planning, or tax review. The purpose of this article is to make access rules clear enough to evaluate those next questions properly.

## Compare Selected Providers' Published Requirements in 2026

The sample below includes platform descriptions and broker disclosures. They are different sources with different purposes. 1031 Crowdfunding's platform and Capulent should not be counted as two independent investment menus simply because both appear here. The platform's disclosure identifies Capulent as the broker-dealer through which certain services are offered. Read the roles as well as the names.

| Source checked | Published statement relevant to minimums | What still needs confirmation |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 1031 Crowdfunding DST properties page | Selected cards display $25,000, $50,000, and $100,000 minimums | Exact offering, investor route, class, and current terms |
| Capulent January 1, 2026 Form CRS | No required minimum account balance; products may have minimum investments | Minimum for the particular product and transaction |
| FNEX June 8, 2026 Form CRS | No firm relationship minimum; investments may carry minimums and other requirements | Offering-level amount and client conditions |
| Realized public FAQ | Free marketplace account and a stated accredited-investor eligibility policy | Eligibility review and terms for the proposed service and offering |

The 1031 Crowdfunding page shows several amounts. A senior-housing card displays $25,000. A Kissimmee multifamily card displays $50,000, and a Sacramento medical-office card displays $100,000. We noted these as page observations, not confirmed purchase terms or available capacity. The displayed label does not establish that the same amount applies to both exchange and cash investors. [1031 Crowdfunding DST properties page](https://www.1031crowdfunding.com/dst-properties/).

Capulent's January 1, 2026 relationship summary separates two rules. It requires no minimum account balance. Certain products may have a minimum investment. This is an important distinction between the firm relationship and the security. It is not a statement that every offering can be purchased in any amount. [Capulent Form CRS, page 1](https://files.brokercheck.finra.org/crs_155155.pdf).

FNEX Capital's summary shows a June 8, 2026 date. It states no minimum amount or other rule to start a firm relationship. It also says some investments may have minimums and rules such as income and net worth thresholds. The document's electronic title retains an older date; the visible page date is used here. [FNEX Form CRS, page 1](https://files.brokercheck.finra.org/crs_166316.pdf).

Realized's FAQ states that creating a marketplace account is free and that only accredited investors are currently eligible to invest. These are the provider's public statements. A free account is different from a completed review of who can invest or an accepted investment. The page does not establish a single investment minimum for every offering. [Realized FAQ](https://www.realized1031.com/frequently-asked-questions).

The table does not rank these providers by affordability. It does not contain a common, confirmed offering available to the same investor on identical terms. Instead, it shows why the next question matters. Ask how each statement applies to the service and offering you are considering. Request a dated source for the answer.

## Identify the Exact DST Offering Behind a Quoted Minimum

Write down the full offering name before comparing dollar amounts. A property nickname or asset type may not identify the legal issuer. Two investments can have similar names while using different terms. Ask for the current offering documents and any relevant supplement. Keep the source of the minimum with the name so another reader can trace the figure.

Add the investor route and class where applicable. If the provider offers more than one route or class, ask which one the quoted amount describes. Do not assume that a website label answers this question. Ask for the amount that applies to your planned purchase. The lowest number elsewhere on the site may have a different scope.

Record the date of the source separately from the date you read it. A page retrieved today can contain an older offering description. A newer supplement may change the information that matters. Your comparison should show both dates and any open version question. This helps prevent a saved screenshot from being treated as a current commitment months later.

Use the controlling documents and the explanation from the party in charge to resolve apparent differences. If a page shows one amount and the packet appears to show another, ask which applies to your planned purchase. Preserve both sources until the question is answered. Do not quietly choose the lower amount or assume that the higher amount proves the page was intentionally wrong.

Aim for a clear answer with a source. Name the offering, route, and class. State the amount and the terms that still apply. Include the steps needed for acceptance. You may not have all those details at first. Keeping the gaps visible is better than presenting an incomplete headline as a final answer.

## Separate Cash-Investment and Exchange Requirements

Ask whether the quoted minimum applies to a purchase with new cash, a 1031 exchange, or both. Do not infer the answer from the word DST alone. The provider should explain the relevant route and documentation. If the amount differs by route, give each a clear label. Avoid treating the smaller figure as a firm-wide rule.

An exchange also has facts that a simple purchase amount does not describe. The taxpayer, ownership, timing, and replacement plan need review by the right professionals. This article does not determine tax qualification. An amount may be large enough for an offering. That alone does not show that the exchange rules are met.

Avoid treating available exchange proceeds as the same as personal cash in a planning sheet. Ask your qualified intermediary (QI) and tax adviser how the planned funds and ownership should be handled. A reader should not move money or change the purchaser merely to fit a minimum without that review. The access question belongs within the actual deal structure, not outside it.

For a first comparison, use separate columns for quoted cash minimum, quoted exchange minimum, source, and status of the answer. If one column has no answer, leave it unconfirmed. Do not copy the amount from the other column to make the table look complete. Missing information is a follow-up item, not a reason to invent a matching rule.

Ask about the amount submitted as well as the amount ultimately accepted. A requested allocation may change before closing, and the relevant minimum may need to be checked again. Your comparison should follow the final planned amount through the process. An early discussion about a larger purchase should not be assumed to cover a later smaller one.

## Understand Accredited Investor Status and Its Limits

The SEC's investor bulletin describes several paths for people. One uses income above $200,000 for an individual. The joint threshold is $300,000 with a spouse or spousal equivalent. The amount must be exceeded in each of the prior two years, with the same reasonable expectation for the current year. Another path uses net worth above $1 million, excluding the primary residence. A Series 7, 65, or 82 license in good standing is another path. The home-debt rules include exceptions, and entity categories differ. This is a short overview, not a status determination. [SEC accredited-investor bulletin](https://www.investor.gov/introduction-investing/general-resources/news-alerts/alerts-bulletins/investor-bulletins/updated-3).

Ask which category the provider expects to review for the actual purchaser. A person's informal description of wealth or experience may not answer the category question. The relevant professionals should explain the facts and records needed. Avoid treating a short online questionnaire as a full legal review of an unusual ownership structure or financial case.

The amount you intend to invest is a separate fact. Enough cash for a minimum does not prove accredited status. A person who qualifies may still choose not to commit that amount. Keep the two decisions apart. One concerns a defined qualification; the other concerns the planned use of capital and the investment's terms.

Do not treat qualification as an endorsement by the SEC or by the provider. The SEC's private-placement bulletin explains that these investments can involve limited disclosure, risk of large losses, and difficult resale. It also explains that Rule 506(c) offerings require reasonable steps to verify accredited status. Eligibility does not erase the need to understand the actual investment. [SEC private-placement bulletin, updated September 21, 2026](https://www.investor.gov/introduction-investing/general-resources/news-alerts/alerts-bulletins/investor-bulletins/private-placements-under-regulation-d-updated-investor-bulletin).

A good provider conversation keeps both questions on the table. First, what rules apply to taking part? Second, what information is needed to assess whether the investment fits the client? An answer to the first question should not close the second. Ask for clear next steps for each rather than allowing a qualified label to end the discussion.

## Check Current Rules Against Proposed Changes

A 2026 comparison needs to distinguish current rules from proposals. One SEC notice is dated September 30, 2026. It appeared in the Federal Register on October 5. It seeks comments on a possible new path based on a U.S. certified public accountant (CPA) license in good standing. Comments are due December 4, 2026. That notice is not an effective designation. [SEC notice on potential CPA eligibility](https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2026-10-05/html/2026-20308.htm).

This distinction affects how you read headlines. A regulator may be considering a new path. That does not mean an applicant can use it today. Record the action type, date, and status of the official source. Have the issuer or right adviser confirm the rule that applies when the investment is being reviewed.

Avoid updating an eligibility checklist based only on a summary of a proposed change. Keep a note that the topic is under review, then check the official outcome before changing the working rule. A later final action may have conditions or an effective date that differ from the proposal. Your comparison should not skip those details to appear more current.

The same habit applies to firm policies. A firm may announce a planned service or new client category before it is available. Ask whether the policy is active, which entity offers it, and what date the terms took effect. A future plan can be worth tracking. Keep it separate from an option you can use now.

## Ask How the Provider Confirms Client Eligibility

Request the process early enough to understand what it involves. Ask who collects information, who reviews it, what records may be needed, and how questions are resolved. The answer should fit the offering and investor route. Firms may request different records. Ask whether they accept a prior review by another party.

Keep sensitive financial records in the approved submission channel. Your sheet can list the document type, reviewer, and status. It need not hold the account or tax details. This keeps the research record useful while reducing unnecessary copies. Confirm the recipient before sharing personal information, especially when more than one service firm is involved.

Ask what a status label means. Received may mean only that a file arrived. Under review may mean a decision is still pending. Accepted for one purpose may not cover another purpose or a later transaction. Use the provider's stated definitions in your notes. If the labels are vague, ask what evidence shows the specific step is complete.

Plan for corrections. A missing page, unclear date, changed ownership name, or inconsistent answer may require follow-up. Ask who will identify the issue and what route should be used to resolve it. A process estimate is more useful when the firm explains what makes a submission complete. It should not be treated as a guaranteed decision time.

Ask whether material changes require another review. The answer may depend on the facts and rules that apply. Keep the date and scope of any prior answer. A record that was useful for one purchaser or offering should not be relabeled as approval for all future purchases. The point is to preserve the basis for the decision, not to collect a permanent badge.

## Review Trust, Entity, and Joint-Ownership Questions

Identify the purchaser as it will appear in the purchase request documents. A person, trust, company, or joint ownership arrangement can raise different questions. Do not use an individual's answer to complete an entity's form without confirming that it is the right basis. The provider and relevant advisers should explain which information belongs to the actual purchaser.

The SEC bulletin includes separate entity categories, with conditions that differ by category. That is why a simple personal net-worth box may not resolve a trust or company case. Use the relevant category and have the details reviewed. This article does not determine entity status or suggest changing ownership to reach a threshold. [SEC overview of accredited-investor categories](https://www.investor.gov/introduction-investing/general-resources/news-alerts/alerts-bulletins/investor-bulletins/updated-3).

Ask how names and authority will be matched across the file. The person discussing the investment may be acting for another purchaser. The documents may require evidence of signing authority or a particular form of ownership. Record these as process questions for the professionals in charge. Do not assume that a shared surname or common address resolves them.

If the planned purchaser changes, recheck who can invest and the minimum amount. An answer tied to the original purchaser may not answer the revised case. Keep the earlier decision with its scope and request a new answer where required. This avoids a file in which correct information about one party is accidentally used to support a different transaction.

Coordinate these questions with exchange planning when relevant. The legal owner and taxpayer facts can matter beyond securities eligibility. Your QI, tax adviser, and legal adviser should address those issues within their roles. A provider's willingness to consider a purchase request does not settle the tax result of changing who buys the interest.

## Test Minimums and Investment Increments Together

A minimum may be only the first amount rule to check. Ask whether purchases above it must follow an increment, unit size, or other stated condition. Do not assume that every dollar amount above the minimum is allowed. Record any such rule from the relevant documents before treating a planned allocation as possible under the amount rules.

Consider a fictional offering with a $100,000 minimum and required $25,000 increments above that amount. A $150,000 purchase request meets the invented amount rule because it is the minimum plus two increments. A $160,000 request does not fit that stated pattern. A $175,000 request is the minimum plus three increments. These are arithmetic examples, not actual offering terms.

| Proposed amount in the fictional example | Amount above $100,000 | Number of $25,000 increments | Fits this amount rule? |
| --- | ---: | ---: | --- |
| $150,000 | $50,000 | 2 | Yes |
| $160,000 | $60,000 | 2.4 | No |
| $175,000 | $75,000 | 3 | Yes |

Passing this check would still leave other conditions open. The purchaser must meet the rules. The offering needs capacity. The purchase request must also be accepted under its terms. A spreadsheet should label this result amount rule met. Calling it eligible or approved would claim more than the calculation establishes.

Also ask how fees and other charges relate to the quoted amount. A minimum investment is not necessarily a complete statement of all costs or of the amount working in the property. Request the relevant cost disclosure and avoid guessing whether a displayed minimum includes every charge. Keep the amount rule and cost analysis linked but distinct.

Do not assume a later partial allocation will still fit the original plan. If the planned amount changes, rerun the amount check using the final request. Record the reason for the change and any new answer needed. This simple step can expose a gap before a planning sheet is mistaken for an accepted purchase request.

## Compare Service Thresholds With Offering Thresholds

A firm may describe more than one service relationship. Ask whether a threshold relates to investment advice, a private-client program, a reporting service, or a specific offering. You may be able to purchase an investment without receiving every service mentioned elsewhere on the site. The agreement should explain what the chosen relationship includes.

Use separate rows for separate services. A conversation about opening a brokerage relationship should not by itself be treated as an answer about advisory access. If a service has a stated minimum, ask how it is measured and which assets count. If the public source does not answer, mark the point unconfirmed rather than filling it with an industry estimate.

Avoid assuming that a higher service threshold guarantees a better experience. It may reflect the scope or business model of that service. Ask what additional work is actually provided, how it is described, and what it costs. Then compare that work with your needs. The dollar rule alone does not measure research quality, response speed, or investment performance.

The opposite mistake is assuming that a no-minimum relationship has no restrictions at all. The sampled broker disclosures distinguish firm access from product rules. A useful comparison preserves that distinction throughout the process. You can ask for a first contact without concluding that every security or every requested allocation is available to you.

Make the final service comparison concrete. Name the service, amount rule if any, included work, cost source, and open questions. Ask the provider to confirm that record for your proposed relationship. This gives each number a clear purpose. A list sorted by amounts with different meanings can be hard to use.

## Work Through a Fictional Allocation Example

Imagine an investor, Daniel, evaluating amount rules for a hypothetical $425,000 planning budget. The example is an arithmetic exercise, not a recommended allocation or an exchange plan. Four invented offerings each have a $100,000 minimum. Daniel first tests the assumed amount rules. His team would then need to assess the investment questions.

Four purchases of $100,000 total $400,000, leaving $25,000 of the planning budget unassigned. Three purchases of $100,000 total $300,000, leaving $125,000. Neither result tells Daniel where the remainder should go. It also does not show that four positions are better than three. The amounts only describe how much of the assumed budget the purchases would use.

Now suppose the fourth invented offering actually has a $150,000 minimum. Buying the other three at $100,000 each plus the fourth at its minimum would require $450,000. That exceeds the $425,000 budget by $25,000. The original four-position plan is no longer feasible under the stated amount rules. Daniel records the gap instead of silently lowering one purchase below its minimum.

| Fictional plan | Total at stated minimums | Difference from $425,000 budget |
| --- | ---: | ---: |
| Four offerings at $100,000 each | $400,000 | $25,000 unassigned |
| Three offerings at $100,000 each | $300,000 | $125,000 unassigned |
| Three at $100,000 plus one at $150,000 | $450,000 | $25,000 over budget |

Daniel asks whether another combination deserves review. That is a new question, not a reason to assume a minimum can be waived. He may need different offerings, a different number of positions, or a different plan. His professionals should evaluate the choices using his full circumstances. The worksheet does not tell him to add cash, borrow, or change an exchange structure.

The word unassigned is deliberate. In a real exchange, a remaining amount can have tax and transaction consequences that need review. This example does not instruct an investor to withdraw or retain exchange proceeds. It shows only a budget difference. The QI and tax adviser should address how the actual funds and replacement plan work together.

A final check concerns the source of each assumption. Daniel labels the fictional rules as examples. For real research, he would replace them only with current terms for named offerings and the relevant purchaser. He would also track whether capacity and acceptance remain open. A correct total built from stale or mismatched inputs can still produce an unusable plan.

## Keep Liquidity and Concentration Separate From Eligibility

A minimum can affect the size of a position, but it does not determine a suitable position size. Suppose a fictional investor has $500,000 in the planning pool being discussed. A $100,000 purchase would use 20% of that pool. Against a different $2 million pool, the same purchase would be 5%. The denominator changes the meaning of the percentage.

State which pool you are measuring. Total assets, investable assets, liquid reserves, and exchange proceeds refer to different amounts. A percentage of one does not by itself describe a percentage of another. Ask the financial professional which measures matter for the planning question and keep the source values clear. Do not use the most favorable denominator simply to make a purchase look small.

Counting investments is also different from assessing diversification. Several offerings may share a sponsor, location, tenant type, or economic exposure. Meeting four minimums does not establish four independent sources of risk. Review the underlying exposures and the rest of the portfolio. The amount worksheet can help organize the discussion, but it cannot finish that analysis.

Keep the need for accessible cash visible. A client may qualify and meet a minimum while needing funds for expenses outside the investment. Discuss those needs before treating the largest affordable purchase as the desired amount. The SEC's private-placement guidance warns about illiquidity; a service relationship does not create a guaranteed exit from an investment. [SEC private-placement risk guidance](https://www.investor.gov/introduction-investing/general-resources/news-alerts/alerts-bulletins/investor-bulletins/private-placements-under-regulation-d-updated-investor-bulletin).

You may qualify but decide to do more research. You may also choose to decline the investment. That does not mean the eligibility review failed. The review answered a narrower question. The financial decision still needs the costs, risks, time horizon, income needs, and alternatives that the threshold itself cannot explain.

## Confirm Exceptions, Capacity, and Acceptance

A firm may mention a possible exception. Ask who can grant it and how the result is noted. A general statement that exceptions sometimes occur is not a confirmed exception for your file. Keep the standard amount and requested exception in separate fields. Wait for a scoped answer from the party in charge.

Do not build a plan that depends on an unconfirmed exception without showing that dependency. A clear note might say that the planned amount is below the stated minimum and a decision is pending. That is more useful than labeling the position available. It lets the team understand why the plan cannot yet be treated as final.

Capacity is another separate question. A displayed offering may have a minimum that you can meet while lacking enough remaining allocation for your request. Ask for the current process to confirm capacity and the effect of any reservation. A public page gives you a dated research source. It does not promise that the same amount will remain available.

Acceptance also needs its own record. Submitting forms, providing facts about who can invest, or sending a requested document may be steps toward a decision. Ask which event establishes that the purchase request has been accepted and what conditions remain. Use those definitions in your plan so an early status does not become a completed investment by mistake.

## Build a Provider Eligibility Comparison Record

Keep one row for each actual service or offering you are comparing. Name the legal entity, role, offering, route, and class. Add the minimum, any increment, investor category, source date, and answer status. Add a short next-action field. The record should show where the answer came from and what still needs a decision from the person in charge.

Use the same labels across providers. Confirmed public statement is different from confirmed for my transaction. Requested exception is different from accepted exception. Amount rule met is different from purchase request accepted. These labels make the comparison easier to read without producing a false overall score. They also prevent a complete-looking spreadsheet from hiding open conditions.

Review the record when the offering, purchaser, amount, or service changes. Keep the earlier entry with its date and add the revised answer. If two sources conflict, record the difference and ask for clarification. The goal is not to create a perfect page on the first attempt. It is to maintain an accurate account of what your team can rely on.

The [provider shortlist framework](/writing/best-dst-1031-exchange-companies-2026-a-shortlist-framework-for-your-next-1031-exchange) can help place this comparison alongside other service questions. Minimums and eligibility belong in that wider review, together with the provider's role, documents, costs, and support. A low entry amount can open a conversation. It should not end the research needed for a sound decision.

## Frequently Asked Questions

### Which DST company has the lowest minimum investment in 2026?

This article does not establish an industry-wide lowest minimum. The public sample includes selected offering cards and firm-level disclosures with different scopes. Confirm the exact offering, route, class, and current terms before comparing amounts. A low number on one page is not a single minimum for every purchase through that provider.

### Does a broker with no account minimum let me invest any amount in a DST?

No such conclusion follows. The sampled disclosures separate relationship rules from product rules. A broker may have no account minimum while an offering has its own purchase minimum and other conditions. Ask for the current terms of the specific investment and the amount rule that applies to your transaction.

### Are cash and 1031 exchange minimums always the same?

Do not assume they are. Ask the provider which route the displayed amount covers and request the relevant offering terms. If the source gives only one unlabeled number, keep the other route unconfirmed. A comparison should not copy a figure between columns merely because both purchases involve a DST.

### Does meeting a DST minimum make me an accredited investor?

No. Purchase size and accredited status are separate questions. The right category and purchaser facts need review under current rules. Having enough money for one offering does not settle that review. Likewise, qualifying under an accreditation category does not establish that a specific investment amount is suitable for you.

### Did the October 2026 CPA notice create a new qualification immediately?

The cited notice requests comments on a potential designation; it is not an effective designation. Check the current official action and rules that apply before relying on a new path. A headline about a proposal should not be used as an approval for a purchase request. The relevant professionals should confirm the status that applies.

### What if my planned amount is above the minimum but does not fit an increment?

Ask the provider how the actual terms apply. In the fictional example, an amount can exceed the minimum while failing the required increment rule. Do not round the request or assume an exception without confirmation. Keep the planned amount and the open condition visible until the party in charge answers.

### Does a lower minimum mean the investment has lower risk?

The minimum describes an amount rule. It does not measure property risk, debt, sponsor quality, fees, or liquidity. A smaller purchase may change the dollars exposed. The investment still needs review on its own terms and within your finances. Compare risk using the relevant evidence rather than the entry amount alone.

### What should I do when a website and offering document show different minimums?

Save the sources with their dates and ask the provider which applies to the exact purchaser, route, and offering. Check for supplements, class differences, or a stated exception. Do not silently select the lower figure. Keep the question open until your team has a scoped answer it can use.

## About Sequoia Research

Sequoia Research, LLC provides independent research on DSTs and other real estate investment offerings. This educational library helps readers examine source materials, understand assumptions, and prepare better questions for their investment, tax, and legal professionals.


## Sources

- [1031 Crowdfunding, DST Properties for 1031 Exchange](https://www.1031crowdfunding.com/dst-properties/). Public offering-card observations and platform role disclosure checked October 16, 2026; no individual allocation or purchase terms confirmed.
- [Capulent, Form CRS](https://files.brokercheck.finra.org/crs_155155.pdf). January 1, 2026, page 1; account minimum versus product minimum.
- [FNEX Capital, Form CRS](https://files.brokercheck.finra.org/crs_166316.pdf). Visible June 8, 2026 date, page 1; firm relationship and product requirements.
- [Realized, Frequently Asked Questions](https://www.realized1031.com/frequently-asked-questions). Current undated page checked October 16, 2026; account access and provider eligibility policy.
- [SEC, Accredited Investors—Updated Investor Bulletin](https://www.investor.gov/introduction-investing/general-resources/news-alerts/alerts-bulletins/investor-bulletins/updated-3). April 14, 2021; current guidance checked October 16, 2026, with separate review of recent official action.
- [SEC, Potential Designation of U.S. Certified Public Accountant License](https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2026-10-05/html/2026-20308.htm). September 30, 2026 notice published October 5, 2026; request for comment, not an effective designation.
- [SEC, Private Placements Under Regulation D](https://www.investor.gov/introduction-investing/general-resources/news-alerts/alerts-bulletins/investor-bulletins/private-placements-under-regulation-d-updated-investor-bulletin). Updated September 21, 2026; disclosure, liquidity, loss, and eligibility-verification context.


## Related Reading and Tools

- [DST Brokers: How to Choose One for Your Investment Needs](https://sequoia-research.com/writing/dst-brokers-how-to-choose-one-for-your-investment-needs)
- [1031 Exchange DST Brokers: What They Do During the Exchange Process](https://sequoia-research.com/writing/1031-exchange-dst-brokers-what-they-do-during-the-exchange-process)
- [DST Due Diligence: A Practical Checklist Before You Invest](https://sequoia-research.com/writing/dst-due-diligence-a-practical-checklist-before-you-invest)