Apparently the the Kaktovik numerals are a base 20 system with a sub-base of 5. Personally changing my own numeral system would be a huge task that I wouldn't undertake unless there were huge benefits. And of course the threshold to change the standards used for education and communication with others would need to be significantly higher.

With that in mind, I would say changing to a base 20 system is not worth it. Base 20 is barely different than 10. For example they have the same prime factors, which mean the same fractions will be have to be written as repeating decimals (or rather, non-decimal fractions).

For that reason, many people advocate for a radix that contains 3 as a prime, since 1/3 is one of the most common fractions, and it should be easily representable. If you want to keep the benefits of having the factors of 10, and perhaps some higher powers of 2, that mans your radix should be 30, 60, or 120. 60 is a common one, first used by the ancient Sumerians.

You may think that 60 is too unwieldy a number to count to, to learn the positional number system, but if you're willing to use a sub-base, like apparently Kaktovik does, so that needn't be a problem.

According to wikipedia, the motivating reason for using Kaktovik is compatibility with Inupiaq languages. I don't speak any Inupiaq languages so that doesn't offer any benefit to me. But I happen to know that the French language does use base 20 counting. I wonder whether any French speakers might be more willing to consider Kaktovik or something similar.