Trust in political institutions is a core concept in political science and, increasingly, public and elite conversation. Whilst there has been decades of research, the causes of trust are still 'protean' and with little concensus over the most important factors (Citrin and Stoker, 2018). We argue that a part of this is due to the overwhelming reliance on survey research in political trust research, combined with a disparate theoretical approach. To address this, this paper presents results from approximately five nationally-representative conjoint experiments in three countries (the UK (x3), US, and Italy) drawing on a parsimonious theoretical framework which encompasses existing empirical work. Results show that the majority of respondents want the same thing from government: a lack of corruption, competence, and one that works in one's interests. Government features, such as ideology and approval rating, also play a role, with governments at the extreme ends of the ideological spectrum less trusted. We show that there are few heterogenous effects across respondents, indicating that most people want the same objective factors. This suggests that trust research should focus less on the link between objective factors, such as corruption and performance, and more on the individual qualities that link these factors to trust judgements.