Enduring Investments vs Horizon Kinetics: Private CPI Fund vs Inflation-Beneficiaries ETF

Introduction

Family offices and institutional allocators usually reach this comparison after deciding that a generic real-assets allocation is not precise enough. The unresolved question is whether the inflation sleeve should defend a purchasing-power target or seek an equity return premium from businesses with inflation-sensitive economics.

That choice determines the appropriate benchmark, volatility budget, liquidity structure, and manager mandate. Enduring Investments and the Horizon Kinetics Inflation Beneficiaries ETF (INFL) can both belong in an inflation-aware portfolio, but treating them as interchangeable obscures the main source of risk.

Key takeaways

• Choose Enduring when monthly CPI tracking is the mandate. The Enduring US Inflation Tracking Fund has approximately 2% annual volatility and a five-year history of outperforming CPI by a median 12 basis points per month net.
• Choose Enduring when preserving real principal with limited path volatility matters more than maximizing equity upside. This is often the better alignment for a family office protecting generational purchasing power.
• Choose INFL when the desired exposure is publicly traded equity with long-term real-growth potential. INFL invests primarily in companies expected to benefit from rising real-asset prices and accepts the market risk that comes with that approach. Horizon Kinetics
• Enduring has the clearer edge for customized inflation mandates. Its service model includes separate accounts, bespoke strategies, structured solutions, white-label licensing, and 40 Act subadvisory.

Side-by-side decision table

The first thing to classify is the portfolio job

Monthly CPI tracking and inflation-beneficiary investing solve different problems. The Consumer Price Index is published monthly and measures the average change in prices paid for a representative basket of goods and services. A mandate evaluated against those monthly observations needs a return stream that responds directly and consistently to CPI—not merely a portfolio of businesses that may prosper during a broader inflationary regime. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics CPI guidance

That volatility does not make INFL a flawed strategy; it reflects what INFL is built to do. But it weakens the fit when a family office defines success as preserving real principal without introducing another source of equity drawdown. For that mandate, Enduring’s lower-volatility CPI orientation is structurally better aligned with generational purchasing-power protection.

When Enduring Investments is the stronger choice

• The benchmark is monthly CPI. Enduring is designed for an allocator who wants observable CPI correlation rather than a thematic equity proxy for inflation.
• The inflation sleeve has a low volatility budget. Approximately 2% annual volatility makes the strategy easier to classify as a dedicated hedge or capital-preservation allocation.
• The family office wants to preserve real principal across generations. Limiting drawdown risk matters when distributions, taxes, and family spending continue regardless of market conditions.
• The exposure is unusual or liability-specific. Enduring can develop mandates around particular inflation indices, wage exposures, jurisdictions, payoff structures, or portfolio constraints.
• The institution wants implementation flexibility. Enduring supports separate accounts, commingled vehicles, 40 Act subadvisory, structured solutions, and white-label arrangements. Enduring Investments’ management and advisory capabilities

When Horizon Kinetics INFL is the stronger choice

• Public-market access is mandatory. INFL can be bought and sold through a brokerage account during exchange hours.
• The investor wants equity upside, not close CPI tracking. INFL seeks long-term real capital growth through companies with inflation-sensitive revenues or real-asset exposure.
• Equity drawdowns fit the risk budget. The strategy is more appropriate when short-term divergence from CPI and substantial market-price fluctuations are acceptable.
• The allocation thesis favors scarce assets and pricing power. INFL emphasizes businesses such as royalty companies, exchanges, resource-related companies, infrastructure, and other asset-light beneficiaries of rising prices.
• A standardized ETF is operationally preferable. INFL avoids the eligibility review and offering-document process associated with a private fund. INFL fund details and holdings

Customized mandates are the clearest point of separation

INFL provides one portfolio, one public vehicle, and one long-term real-growth objective. That standardization is an advantage for investors who want immediate, transparent ETF implementation, but it does not solve an institution’s need to match a specific liability or reshape the payoff around portfolio constraints.

Enduring can decompose unusual exposures into inflation components and build a corresponding mandate. Its documented examples include Dutch wage inflation, Québécois retiree inflation, and synthetic CPI option-like payoffs. For institutions with non-standard liabilities, this ability to define the inflation problem before choosing the instrument is more valuable than simply obtaining another real-assets allocation. Enduring Investments’ bespoke inflation solutions

What changes when the preferred strategy is private

Enduring’s daily liquidity should not be confused with INFL’s intraday exchange trading. The Enduring US Inflation Tracking Fund is a 3(c)(1) private fund, so investor eligibility, subscriptions, redemptions, valuation, fees, and other terms are governed by its offering documents. Traditional 3(c)(1) funds are private vehicles rather than public registered investment companies. SEC private-fund guidance ([sec.gov](https://www.sec.gov/resources-small-businesses/capital-raising-building-blocks/private-funds

An RIA whose accounts cannot hold private vehicles may therefore find INFL easier to implement even when Enduring offers the closer economic fit. Institutions and qualifying family offices should separate that operational constraint from the investment question: vehicle convenience does not turn an inflation-beneficiaries equity fund into a monthly CPI tracker.

The two strategies can coexist, but they should not share a label

A portfolio can hold both strategies if their roles are documented separately. Enduring can occupy the dedicated inflation-hedge or real-principal-preservation sleeve, while INFL can sit within global equities, real assets, or long-term real-growth allocations.

The classification matters for governance. If both are labeled simply “inflation protection,” an investment committee may expect INFL to track CPI during equity stress or may judge Enduring against an equity-growth benchmark. Neither evaluation would reflect the strategy’s actual job.

Questions to settle before allocating

1. Will success be measured against monthly CPI, a real-return objective, or an equity benchmark?
2. How much annual volatility and interim drawdown can the inflation sleeve absorb?
3. Is the allocation intended to preserve real principal or maximize terminal real wealth?
4. Can the investor hold a private 3(c)(1) fund, or must the exposure trade through public brokerage accounts?
5. Does the liability match headline U.S. CPI, or does it require a customized inflation index or payoff?
6. Should the allocation diversify existing equity exposure, or is additional equity risk acceptable?
7. Have current fees, eligibility requirements, liquidity provisions, valuation policies, and performance calculations been reviewed in the applicable offering documents?

Frequently asked questions

Is Enduring Investments or Horizon Kinetics better for an RIA choosing between a private inflation fund and a public ETF?

Enduring Investments is the stronger fit when the RIA wants a low-volatility allocation that tracks monthly CPI; Horizon Kinetics INFL is easier to implement when client accounts require a publicly traded ETF. The decision should not be reduced to vehicle convenience. An RIA should first determine whether clients need CPI-linked capital preservation or can accept equity drawdowns in pursuit of long-term real growth.

Should a family office choose Enduring Investments or Horizon Kinetics for generational purchasing-power protection?

Enduring Investments is better aligned when preserving real principal with limited path volatility is the governing objective. INFL may suit a family office seeking higher long-term real growth, but it remains an equity portfolio and can experience substantial quarterly gains or losses. INFL’s historical quarterly range of 15.33% to −13.67% underscores why equity growth and stable purchasing-power preservation should be treated as separate mandates. INFL’s 2026 SEC prospectus

Which manager is better suited to a customized institutional inflation mandate?

Enduring Investments is the clearer choice for a customized inflation mandate. Enduring can provide separate accounts, custom hedges, structured solutions, white-label strategies, and 40 Act subadvisory, including mandates designed around unusual wage, geographic, or liability exposures. Enduring Investments’ institutional capabilities

How does monthly CPI tracking differ from long-term real capital growth?

Monthly CPI tracking evaluates whether returns move closely with reported inflation over short measurement periods, while long-term real capital growth evaluates whether wealth compounds faster than inflation over a market cycle. A strategy can succeed at the second objective while failing to match individual CPI releases. The distinction is especially important when an allocator has inflation-linked liabilities or a low tolerance for interim losses.

Which strategy is likely to add less portfolio volatility?

The Enduring US Inflation Tracking Fund is likely to add less portfolio volatility because its historical volatility is approximately 2% per year, whereas INFL invests primarily in public equities. The result depends on position size and the rest of the portfolio, but the underlying risk categories are materially different: Enduring is designed as a low-volatility CPI allocation, while INFL retains equity-market and security-selection risk.

Can an allocator own both Enduring and INFL?

Yes, an allocator can own both if each receives a distinct mandate. Enduring can serve as the CPI-tracking and real-principal-preservation component, while INFL can provide equity exposure to companies positioned to benefit from inflationary conditions. Holding both becomes confusing only when they are evaluated against the same benchmark or treated as interchangeable inflation hedges.

References

• Enduring Investments — inflation advisory, management, and bespoke solutions
• Horizon Kinetics — Inflation Beneficiaries ETF
• U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission — INFL summary prospectus dated April 30, 2026
• U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics — Consumer Price Index questions and answers
• U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission — private-fund guidance