Quantum Imbalance

“Quantum Imbalance” – a cartoon illustrates that quantum computing can feel both overhyped and underestimated, largely because parts of the industry are building muscle at very different speeds.

Technically, quantum resembles classical computing in the 1950s. The science is real and the machines can perform remarkable calculations, but they remain expensive, fragile and difficult to operate. IBM, Google, Quantinuum, IonQ and Rigetti are steadily improving qubit quality and error correction, yet today’s systems are still closer to scientific instruments than general-purpose commercial computers.

Commercially, quantum looks more like artificial intelligence before ChatGPT. AI was already powerful, but most companies were still searching for products that customers immediately understood and wanted. ChatGPT changed that by turning complex technology into a simple experience and reaching an estimated 100 million monthly users within two months. Quantum has promising applications in drug discovery, materials science, finance and logistics, but it has not yet found an equivalent product that makes its value obvious.

The investment cycle belongs to another era again. IonQ, Rigetti and D-Wave entered public markets through SPAC transactions, reflecting investors’ willingness to fund the industry’s future before its business models had matured. That dynamic also recalls crypto’s ICO boom, when capital flowed into infrastructure long before dependable commercial applications emerged.

The financial gap between companies shows how uneven the market remains. IonQ reported $130 million in 2025 revenue, up 202% year over year, while Rigetti reported only $1.9 million in fourth-quarter revenue alongside a $22.6 million operating loss.

As IBM Research Director Darío Gil said, “We are firmly within the era in which quantum computers are being used as a tool to explore new frontiers of science.” Quantum’s next era will begin when those frontiers become products customers cannot afford to ignore.