CRJ Captain reported a CFIT event during an unstable approach which was followed by a safe approach and landing. The Captain added that the approach for aircraft type should be modified for the specific model.

Narrative

We were flying Aircraft X ZZZ1 - ZZZ. ZZZ was using RNAV XX approach. We did one approach and ended up high and unstable so we initiated a go-around. The second time flying the approach I hand flew more of it and we compensated on being high and were a bit lower on this approach. Near the end of this approach we received a low altitude alert from ATC and corrected our path up a little. My First Officer (FO) was calling out altitudes and it appeared we were hitting the altitudes that were recommended. We were clear of all obstacles. This approach is not designed to meet stabilized criteria at all; and especially for the CRJ-900 is not built to help with our avionics capabilities. I have flown this approach less than 5 times. I think the cause could have been an overcompensation on the second approach; but we were clear of obstacles and according to my FO we were hitting the recommended altitudes while I was looking outside to line up with the runway.I think this new approach is overly complicated and not designed to handle stabilized criteria in our manual. Also; the avionics capabilities and how the CRJ flies do not conform to help us fly this approach. Evidence is already in the fact that we cannot fly the recommended lateral path or abide by the speed restrictions on the approach plate. I think this approach should not be given to CRJs; and needs to be redesigned; or it needs to be turned back into a fully visual approach and ATC should be using a visual approach. This approach does not help us meet stabilized criteria for an instrument approach. Evidence for this is already in our Company pages that we cannot follow the lateral path or meet the speed requirements for the missed approach.