It seems spaced a bit tight.
Maybe a bit too mechanical in construction.
Nice Q, though! :-)

Add some grace!

Is the second image the source file or something you did using the typeface?

The latter.

The H and M look a bit “reproductive”.

The /u/ and /y/ are the only glyphs that loop. The /y/ looks like 'er' or 'ej' or 'ejr' and the /u/ looks like 'ei'. I think it would be more consistent and more easily interpreted if they both had solid decorative tips instead of the open loops. Some of the confusion may be due to the very tight spacing that butts both of these letters up against their predecessor.

I would say same thing as others on the “mechanical construction”. For instance, the /D its a reverse /C with a bar. Same for the /a,n,d. Do not overuse the mirror effect. Some letters are pretty /Q,i,j,f,y. Keep going.

There are not enough space between letters and the tail of the "a" and "n" is too close to the stems.
The "U" is very interesting.

imo it is too curvy and sexual. the downward stroke on the minoscule n has been re-used on too many of the other letters. I suggest you design a secondary way to give the curved strokes to the glyphs, such as m or x or whatnot, so that this large downward stroke on the n and in some other places is not recuced in value and beauty.

imo

most of the capitals are pretty awesome, however.

Agree with others - the spacing is uneven. The word spacing in your sample is much too large and the letter spacing too small. Hand-written forms need to have a strong rhythm, and that means considering the spacing of verticals as well as balancing the open counters. Agree with others that the repetition of the inner tendril is too obvious, needs more variation. But then I think you'll have something very interesting and worth-while.