Capital Class Comparator
Compare PSC against debt, equity, and traditional philanthropy across 8 dimensions. Understand the structural advantages of regenerative capital.
Select capital classes to compare:
Multi-Dimensional Comparison
Dimension Scores
Does capital multiply or deplete?
How much control does recipient retain?
How patient is the capital?
Who can access this capital?
Who bears the downside risk?
Direct societal benefit created
Can this model persist indefinitely?
Adaptability to changing needs
Structural Characteristics
| Characteristic | Traditional Philanthropy | Perpetual Social Capital |
|---|---|---|
| Return Requirement | None (reporting required) | Pay-it-forward (not to donor) |
| Ownership Transfer | None | None |
| Time Pressure | Low-Medium (grant cycles) | Very Low (perpetual) |
| Best For | Social missions without revenue model | Lifecycle-aligned social impact |
| Limitations | One-time impact, donor dependency, competitive | Requires recycling infrastructure, trust network |
The Fourth Capital Class
Traditional capital (debt, equity) extracts value from recipients. Traditional philanthropy provides relief but depletes with each use. PSC creates a fourth option: capital that regenerates through beneficiary pay-it-forward, combining the social purpose of philanthropy with the sustainability of investment. The key innovation is redirecting the "return" from donor to next beneficiary—preserving the gift relationship while enabling perpetual impact.