will quantum computing stocks go up? Guide

Will quantum computing stocks go up?

Lead summary (what this article covers)

will quantum computing stocks go up is a common investor question that asks whether publicly traded companies exposed to quantum computing—pure‑play names such as IonQ, Rigetti, D‑Wave, Quantum Computing Inc., and large incumbents like IBM, Alphabet/Google, Microsoft, and Honeywell/Quantinuum—are likely to rise in price. This article scopes the topic to equities and ETFs (not private rounds), summarizes analyst forecasts and recent 2024–2026 market moves, explains technology and commercial adoption factors, and offers practical evaluation and portfolio approaches for investors who want exposure.

As of 2026-01-16, according to coverage in CNBC, Jefferies, Motley Fool and Investopedia, the quantum computing sector has seen notable rallies, wide analyst divergence, and continued high volatility. This guide synthesizes those sources and frames plausible timeframes and triggers without providing financial advice.

Background — what is “quantum computing” and why investors care

Quantum computing uses quantum bits, or qubits, which can encode more information than classical bits because they exploit superposition and entanglement.

• Qubits: basic quantum information units that can be 0 and 1 simultaneously in superposition.
• Gate‑model vs annealing: gate‑model (universal quantum computing) aims to run quantum circuits for broad algorithms; quantum annealing (D‑Wave style) targets optimization problems via energy‑landscape approaches.
• Photonic, trapped‑ion and superconducting approaches: hardware platforms differ (e.g., IonQ uses trapped ions; Rigetti uses superconducting qubits; photonic firms pursue light‑based qubits).

Investors care because quantum computing promises strategic advantages in simulation (chemistry, materials, drug discovery), optimization (logistics, finance), cryptography (breaking or reinforcing crypto primitives), and potential acceleration for certain AI workloads. However, commercial revenues remain limited today; most market moves are driven by expectations about future breakthroughs and adoption rather than large current cash flows. In short: investors trade the future potential and possible first‑mover rents, not mature earnings.

Market structure and types of investment exposure

Equity exposure to quantum computing falls into broad categories with different risk/liquidity profiles:

• Pure‑play quantum companies: publicly listed specialist firms such as IonQ, Rigetti, D‑Wave, Quantum Computing Inc., and a handful of smaller names. These offer direct exposure but carry high technical and execution risk, limited current revenues, and frequent dilution events.
• Legacy / large‑cap tech with quantum programs: IBM, Alphabet/Google, Microsoft, Honeywell/Quantinuum and other industrial firms run long‑term quantum R&D programs and provide cloud access to quantum hardware. These names provide indirect, lower‑risk exposure because quantum is one of many revenue streams.
• ETFs and funds: specialist ETFs and actively managed funds that bundle multiple quantum and related technologies provide diversified exposure and smoother idiosyncratic risk than single stocks. Defiance’s quantum thematic ETF and similar funds have become distribution points for retail and institutional flows.
• Private companies and IPO candidates: many quantum startups remain private; eventual IPOs or spin‑outs (e.g., Quantinuum or other Honeywell‑related initiatives) are liquidity events to watch.

Key structural differences: pure‑plays typically trade at high P/S or speculative multiples, have thinner liquidity, and show higher beta relative to broad tech. Large caps trade on fundamentals across many businesses and offer practical access via cloud partnerships or corporate contracts.

Recent price performance and market context (2024–2026)

As of 2026-01-16, the quantum sector has shown two defining dynamics: episodic rallies led by pure‑play names and close correlation with the broader AI/tech narrative.

• Pure‑play rallies: Several pure‑play quantum companies rallied sharply in 2025 and into 2026 as investors priced improved roadmaps, commercialization claims, and favorable analyst notes. That price action included high intraday volatility and multiple gap moves tied to specific news items.
• ETF performance: Quantum thematic ETFs recorded inflows in windows when headlines highlighted partnerships, government funding or analyst price‑target upgrades. ETFs smoothed idiosyncratic volatility but still tracked headline sentiment.
• Correlation with AI/tech: The sector’s momentum has been amplified by the broader AI rally. When markets bid up AI and semiconductor infrastructure stocks, speculative quantum names frequently benefited from re‑rated multiples.

Multiple outlets (Motley Fool, Investopedia and Barron’s) documented both outsized upside potential cited by bulls and sharp pullbacks noted by bears during this period. Jefferies’ mid‑2025 coverage of D‑Wave and other research notes were frequently cited by media as catalysts for short‑term rallies.

Key companies and profiles

IonQ — profile and investor issues

IonQ builds trapped‑ion quantum computers and provides cloud access and enterprise partnerships.

Investor considerations:

• Technology: trapped‑ion qubits are often praised for coherence times and gate fidelity, which are attractive for some algorithm classes.
• Business: IonQ has pursued cloud‑access models and partnerships with hyperscalers and cloud providers; revenue remains modest relative to market capitalization for much of 2024–2026.
• Capital markets: coverage in Motley Fool and other outlets highlighted dilution risk from equity raises and acquisitions to extend runway; investors frequently cited diluted share counts when valuing IonQ.

As of 2026-01-16, multiple commentaries noted that IonQ’s narrative depends on demonstrating steady, measurable revenue growth and expanded enterprise contracts; absent those, valuation remains sensitive to sentiment.

Rigetti Computing — profile and investor issues

Rigetti is a superconducting‑qubit hardware developer that also focuses on hybrid quantum‑classical software and partnerships.

Investor considerations:

• Technology and commercialization: Rigetti emphasizes integrated stacks (hardware + software) and announced collaborations for vertical use cases such as optimization pilots.
• Market reception: performance has been volatile. Analysts track Rigetti’s ability to sign paying enterprise customers and scale manufacturing/testing to meet commercial demand.

Coverage in 2024–2026 noted that Rigetti’s progress on cloud access and enterprise pilots would be primary catalysts for sustained valuation improvement.

D‑Wave Quantum — profile and investor issues

D‑Wave pursues quantum annealing and hybrid quantum‑classical systems tailored to optimization problems.

Investor considerations:

• Commercial traction: D‑Wave has emphasized real customers and optimization pilots in logistics and finance, positioning annealing/hybrid systems as nearer‑term useful products.
• Analyst views: As of 2025, Jefferies issued a bullish note for D‑Wave with a price target that news outlets summarized as implying meaningful upside (reported commentary suggested roughly ~90% upside in some writeups).

D‑Wave’s investor story is often framed around nearer‑term enterprise use cases and measurable pilot results rather than pure universal‑quantum promises.

Quantum Computing Inc. and other small pure‑plays

Smaller public names and micro‑caps in the quantum theme vary widely in business models and credibility.

Investor considerations:

• Revenue mismatch: several names have market caps that far exceed present revenue and cash‑flow fundamentals.
• Speculation and meme dynamics: some tickers showed speculative interest disconnected from underlying progress; coverage from Motley Fool and Investopedia cautioned investors about names driven more by social‑media hype than commercial milestones.

Big‑tech and industrial exposures (IBM, Alphabet/Google, Microsoft, Honeywell/Quantinuum)

Large incumbents give indirect exposure to quantum computing via R&D, cloud access, and enterprise ecosystems.

Investor considerations:

• Lower risk: these companies carry diverse businesses; quantum is strategic but fractions of revenue.
• Access: cloud‑based quantum services (IBM Quantum, Google Quantum AI, Microsoft Azure Quantum) enable enterprises to experiment without buying hardware.
• Liquidity and optionality: a spin‑out or IPO (e.g., discussions around Quantinuum) would create new public access; these events are watched closely by investors.

For many investors, allocating to large‑cap tech for quantum exposure is a lower‑volatility path than single pure‑play stocks.

Drivers that could push quantum computing stocks higher

Positive catalysts that could lift quantum stocks include:

• Demonstrated commercial wins: paying customers, renewals, and clear enterprise deployments create revenue visibility and justify higher multiples.
• Technical breakthroughs: reliable error correction, demonstrable logical qubits, or a meaningful increase in qubit quality/scale would change technical feasibility perceptions.
• Useful near‑term applications: if hybrid quantum‑classical methods reliably outperform classical approaches for important optimization or simulation problems, market expectations would re‑rate.
• AI demand and compute diversification: the AI infrastructure narrative has increased appetite for diverse compute primitives; quantum could be positioned as complementary for specific workloads.
• Favorable analyst and institutional flows: prominent price‑target upgrades or institutional accumulation can drive retail follow‑through.
• IPOs and liquidity events: spin‑outs (e.g., reported Quantinuum/Quantinuum IPO speculation) or direct listings tend to refocus attention and bring fresh capital.
• Government funding and defense contracts: large R&D contracts from governments can extend runway and validate technical claims.

Each driver varies in timing and probability; combinations (e.g., a breakthrough plus enterprise wins) would be most potent for sustained re‑rating.

Risks and headwinds that could prevent gains (or cause declines)

Key risks for investors:

• Technical timelines and uncertainty: universal, fault‑tolerant quantum computing may be many years away; promised breakthroughs often miss optimistic timelines.
• Stretched valuations and bubble dynamics: several pure‑play valuations in 2024–2026 were premised on long‑dated optionality, making them vulnerable to sentiment reversals.
• Shareholder dilution: small quantum firms frequently issue equity to fund R&D, diluting existing holders (a notable issue called out for IonQ in multiple commentaries).
• Limited current revenues: with low present revenue, firms often lack earnings buffers, so negative news can trigger outsized declines.
• Competition from classical compute and AI hardware: improvements in classical algorithms, specialized accelerators and AI compute infrastructure can blunt some near‑term quantum use cases.
• Macro and sector rotation risk: broader selloffs in tech or a rotation away from growth/speculative themes could disproportionately harm quantum plays.
• Regulatory and defense sensitivities: some quantum developments intersect with national security and encryption; regulatory scrutiny or export controls could affect customers and partners.

Investors should treat these names as high‑risk, high‑uncertainty instruments and plan position sizing accordingly.

What analysts and media say (summary of recent coverage)

As of 2026-01-16, reporting and analyst coverage across outlets show a clear split:

• Bullish, valuation‑forward notes: Jefferies and a subset of boutique analysts have issued buy ratings or bullish price targets on specific names (Jefferies’ D‑Wave commentary was widely covered and described as implying large upside); some media pieces highlighted the possibility of substantial re‑rating if commercial signs materialize.
• Cautious/critical coverage: Motley Fool and Investopedia pieces emphasized the speculative nature of many pure‑plays, highlighting dilution, weak revenue versus market cap, and the long timeline to broad commercial relevance. Barron’s and other financial press have published comparative analyses that favor diversified or large‑cap exposure over micro‑cap pure‑plays.

Concrete examples cited in news coverage included Jefferies’ bullish D‑Wave note and Motley Fool’s longer-form cautions on IonQ’s valuation and dilution path. Coverage tends to be event‑driven: analyst upgrades, pilot wins, government funding announcements and IPO rumors caused the largest price moves.

How to evaluate quantum computing stocks (practical metrics)

Investors should use a mix of technical, commercial and financial metrics:

• Revenue growth and customer traction: look for signed contracts, paid pilots, and recurring revenues.
• Margin trends and unit economics: although early, improving gross margins or per‑customer economics matter.
• R&D roadmap milestones: public, verifiable technical milestones (e.g., logical qubit demos, error‑correction advances).
• Cash runway and balance sheet strength: runway reduces the need for dilutive financing and signals confidence in commercialization timelines.
• Share‑count trends: monitor outstanding shares and recent equity raises for dilution risk.
• Partnerships and enterprise pilots: credible enterprise customers, channel partnerships, or cloud deals lend credibility.
• Independent technical validation: peer‑reviewed benchmarks, third‑party validations, and open demonstrations are higher quality signals than marketing claims.
• Relative valuation metrics: use P/S where revenue is positive; otherwise consider enterprise value versus cash and short‑term revenue potential. Compare to peers and big‑tech R&D allocations.

A disciplined investor weighs technical milestones against financial runway and dilution risk. For many small public quantum firms, non‑dilutive government grants and long‑term contracts improve the investment case.

Investment strategies and portfolio positioning

Practical approaches for different risk tolerances:

• Small, speculative allocation to pure‑plays: allocate a limited percentage of risk capital to one or two pure‑play names for long‑dated optionality; expect wide swings and plan to hold through technical milestones.
• Prefer diversified ETFs or large‑cap exposure: use quantum thematic ETFs or big‑tech names (IBM, Alphabet, Microsoft, Honeywell/Quantinuum) for smoother exposure tied to quantum progress.
• Milestone‑based investing: buy or add on verifiable commercialization milestones (first paying customer, repeatable revenue, demonstrable technical result) and trim on news‑driven rallies.
• Hedging and position sizing: use small position sizes, stop rules, or paired trades to limit single‑ticker exposure.
• Long horizon mindset: quantum technology may take years to materialize into broad profits; investors with shorter horizons should favor less speculative instruments.

If you plan to trade these names, use a regulated, liquid exchange. For custody and wallet needs, consider Bitget Wallet; to trade equities or ETFs tied to quantum themes, Bitget’s platform provides market access and order types suitable for active and passive strategies.

Plausible scenarios and timeframes

Three scenario archetypes, with plausible triggers and timelines:

• Bull scenario (3–7 years): multiple firms demonstrate reliable error correction and logical‑qubit scaling; enterprise pilots show consistent advantage over classical methods for a set of important use cases → broad adoption accelerates, valuations re‑rate materially.

• Base scenario (5–10+ years): steady technical progress with incremental commercial pilots and occasional hype‑driven rallies; quantum becomes useful in narrow niches (specialized simulation, optimization) but broad fault‑tolerant usefulness remains distant.

• Bear scenario (multi‑year): timelines slip, promised milestones fail to scale, persistent dilution and macro selloffs compress valuations; many pure‑plays underperform or consolidations occur, while big‑tech captures most long‑term value.

Timeframes depend heavily on technical progress, access to non‑dilutive funding, enterprise adoption cycles, and macro liquidity conditions.

Related instruments and events to watch

Useful market signals and instruments to track:

• Quantum ETFs and sector flows: fund inflows/outflows indicate institutional appetite and retail sentiment.
• Analyst coverage and price targets: large upgrades or downgrades move speculative names substantially.
• IPO and spin‑out filings: any public listing of a major quantum asset (e.g., a Quantinuum IPO if pursued) would create a new investable vehicle.
• Government funding announcements: major national programs or defense contracts can materially extend runways.
• Enterprise pilot wins and partnerships: verified contracts with large corporations, logistics firms or pharma boost credibility.
• Technical milestones: published demonstrations of error correction, logical qubits, or benchmarks where quantum advantage is replicated.

Watching these signals helps investors separate hype from substance.

Frequently asked questions

Q: Are quantum computing stocks the same as AI stocks? A: No. There is overlap in investor interest and broader compute narratives, but quantum computing is a distinct technology with different timelines and technical challenges. AI stocks capture near‑term demand for GPUs, CPUs and data, while quantum stocks are tied to qubit scaling, error correction and niche algorithms.

Q: Which names are least risky? A: Larger incumbents with diversified businesses (IBM, Alphabet/Google, Microsoft, Honeywell/Quantinuum) are generally the least risky way to get indirect exposure. ETFs that bundle names also reduce single‑company risk.

Q: How long until practical value? A: Uncertain. Estimates range: a few years for narrow, useful quantum‑assisted solutions (hybrid optimization) to a decade or more for general‑purpose, fault‑tolerant quantum advantage. The timing depends on error correction and scalable architectures.

References and further reading

As of 2026-01-16, the synthesis in this article draws on reporting and analysis from the following sources: Motley Fool (IonQ and sector analyses), CNBC coverage of Jefferies’ D‑Wave commentary, Investopedia’s primer pieces, Barron’s comparative analyses, Defiance Quantum ETF coverage and curated industry lists, IBD reporting on potential Quantinuum spin‑outs, and industry analyst notes summarized in mainstream financial press.

Where possible, readers should verify specific data (market caps, analyst price targets, ETF holdings) from company filings, exchange disclosures and fund fact sheets. Media coverage cited above provided the narrative context summarized here.

Editorial note on uncertainty and investor responsibility

Markets priced expectations for long‑dated technological change. will quantum computing stocks go up cannot be answered with certainty. Historical price moves reflect a mix of technical advances, analyst positioning and speculative flows. Past performance is not indicative of future results. This article is informational, not investment advice. Readers should perform their own due diligence and consult a licensed financial advisor before making investment decisions.

Explore quantum exposure responsibly — learn more about trading and custody options on Bitget. For trading access and wallet services, consider Bitget and Bitget Wallet as part of your toolkit.