Quantum computing: what’s funding like now?

All funding deals in the quantum computing market over the last 24 months

Below is the table listing all the deals. You can find our methodology at the end of this page.

If you want a deeper understanding of the market and its current dynamics, get our report covering the Quantum Computing Market.

Is quantum computing funding actually healthier now?

Yes. Quantum computing funding looks clearly healthier today because more companies are raising, deals are more frequent, typical rounds are much bigger, and the market depends far less on a few giant financings.

We counted 66 private funding deals from September 20, 2025 to September 19, 2026, up from 39 during the previous 12 months. The number of funded companies climbed from 34 to 53, while the median round more than doubled from $16.25 million to $34 million.

Total disclosed and usable capital increased much less dramatically, from $2.63 billion to $3.03 billion. That 15% headline understates the improvement because the previous period contained PsiQuantum's $1 billion round and Quantinuum's roughly $600 million financing.

The clearest change is underneath those headline dollars. Capital below the biggest rounds increased, normal months became much busier, and large checks were spread across far more companies. There are still weak spots, especially poorer disclosure around Chinese deals, but we see broader funding rather than a market being carried by two or three names.

Metric	Current 12M	Previous 12M / Change
Deals	66	39 / +69.2%
Unique companies	53	34 / +55.9%
Companies funded multiple times	10	5 / +100%
Disclosed/usable capital	$3.03B	$2.63B / +15.0%
Capital excluding >$50M rounds	$461M	$347M / +32.8%
Capital excluding >$100M rounds	$868M	$347M / +150.1%
Median round	$34.0M	$16.25M / +109.2%
Average round	$70.3M	$82.2M / -14.4%
Largest round	$350M	$1.0B / -65.0%
First financings	16	10 / +60.0%

Is quantum computing funding still growing if we remove the megadeals?

It is. Quantum computing funding actually looks stronger once the largest rounds are stripped out.

Total capital rose 15%, but funding excluding rounds above $50 million increased 33%. Once we exclude rounds above $100 million, capital jumps from $347 million to $868 million, a 150% increase.

The comparison period had an unusually heavy top end. PsiQuantum raised $1 billion, Quantinuum raised about $600 million, and IQM raised $320 million. Those three deals alone made a relatively thin year look much bigger.

The current period works differently. OQC's $350 million Series C is the largest financing, followed by several rounds in the $100 million to $300 million range. We now have a much thicker middle and upper-middle layer instead of one extraordinary transaction doing most of the work.

Concentration confirms it. The top three rounds represented 73% of disclosed capital one year earlier. They account for 28.1% now. Meanwhile, the number of rounds above $50 million increased from six to 17.

Concentration	Current 12M	Previous 12M
Largest deal / capital	11.6%	38.0%
Top 3 / capital	28.1%	73.0%
Top 5 / capital	40.5%	82.9%
Top 10 / capital	64.2%	91.7%
Rounds above $50M	17	6
>$50M rounds / all deals	25.8%	15.4%
Rounds above $100M	12	6
>$100M capital share	71.3%	86.8%

Are more quantum computing companies actually getting funded now?

Yes. Quantum computing funding is reaching many more companies now, and a normal month is much more active than it was a year earlier.

We found 53 funded companies versus 34 previously. Deal activity rose even faster, from 39 transactions to 66, because more companies also returned for another round.

The monthly numbers make the change easier to picture. The median rolling month went from three deals to five. Median disclosed capital per month jumped from $36.5 million to $205.5 million, even while the biggest monthly spike fell from almost $2 billion to $584 million.

Previously, a few exceptional weeks could dominate the whole year. These days, funding activity is much more evenly distributed across the calendar.

Are quantum investors backing new startups or mostly doubling down on existing winners?

They are doing both. Quantum investors are funding more new startups while putting much larger checks into companies that have already raised before.

First financings increased from 10 to 16, while follow-ons rose from 29 to 50. The split barely changed: roughly one-quarter of transactions are still first financings and three-quarters are follow-ons.

The money going into each group changed much more. The median first financing climbed from $2.5 million to $6.7 million, while the median follow-on more than doubled from $22 million to $47 million.

Oratomic is the extreme case. Founded in 2026, the company raised a $300 million Series A as its first recorded financing to pursue a fault-tolerant neutral-atom quantum computer. That single deal lifts aggregate first-financing capital sharply, so the median is more useful here than the total.

Younger companies are also getting funded. Median company age at financing fell from four years to 3.5 years, while the median age of follow-on recipients moved from five years to four. We therefore do not see capital retreating toward an older, closed group of incumbents.

Metric	Current 12M	Previous 12M
First financings	16	10
First-financing share	24.2%	25.6%
Known first-financing capital	$391M	$41M
Median first financing	$6.7M	$2.5M
Follow-ons	50	29
Follow-on share	75.8%	74.4%
Known follow-on capital	$2.63B	$2.59B
Median follow-on	$47M	$22M

Are quantum computing rounds getting much bigger now?

They are. The typical quantum computing financing is much larger now, even though the average round has fallen.

The median went from $16.25 million to $34 million. The average moved the other way, from $82.2 million to $70.3 million, largely because the previous period's $1 billion PsiQuantum round and roughly $600 million Quantinuum round pulled the mean upward.

The deal-size distribution makes the change obvious. Among rounds where we have a usable amount, sub-$5 million financings fell from 34.4% to 16.3%. At the other end, rounds of at least $100 million increased from six to 14.

There is now much more funding in the $20 million to $200 million range. For a capital-intensive sector that needs chips, cryogenics, fabrication, control systems, facilities and complete machines, that is a meaningful change.

Is quantum hardware taking over the funding market?

Pretty much. Quantum hardware systems have become the clear center of funding activity, while software and middleware have failed to keep up.

Hardware-system financings jumped from 17 to 44, taking their share of all deals from 43.6% to 66.7%. The median hardware round also rose from about $19.8 million to $87.2 million.

Several current deals show how broad this has become. OQC raised $350 million to expand deployed quantum infrastructure. Oratomic raised $300 million for its fault-tolerant neutral-atom architecture. Quantum Motion raised $160 million around silicon-spin quantum computing, while Quobly raised €115 million to industrialize silicon quantum processors.

Components are more mixed. Total disclosed capital rose from $173 million to $293 million, but the number of deals slipped from 11 to 10 and the median round fell. QuantWare's $178 million financing accounts for much of the increase and is explicitly funding KiloFab, which the company says will multiply production capacity by about twenty.

Programming software stayed roughly flat, with six deals versus five and slightly less disclosed capital. Middleware produced more deals but much less money, partly because the previous period included Quantum Machines' $150 million financing.

The current funding race is increasingly about who can build, manufacture and deploy physical quantum systems at scale.

Are early-stage quantum startups suddenly raising scale-up money?

In many cases, yes. Early-stage quantum funding now comes with check sizes that often look more like later-stage financing.

Seed and Series A still represent almost exactly the same share of deals as before: 63.6% today versus 64.1% previously. Their share of capital, however, rose from 8.6% to 35.6%.

Series A shows the change most clearly. Its deal share fell from 33.3% to 27.3%, yet its share of funding jumped from 6.5% to 28%. The median Series A rose from $19.6 million to $43.5 million.

Oratomic's $300 million round pushes the category upward, but the wider pattern goes beyond one company. Seed median size also increased, and Series B rounds became much larger despite being less common.

Stage labels therefore tell only part of the story right now. Some quantum companies still look early on paper while already needing industrial-scale capital.

Stage	Deal share current	Deal share previous	Median current	Median previous
Seed	36.4%	30.8%	$7.4M	$4.16M
Series A	27.3%	33.3%	$43.5M	$19.6M
Series B	7.6%	20.5%	$145M	$72M
Series C	9.1%	7.7%	$130M	$130M
Growth Equity	6.1%	0%	$110M	—
Series D+	1.5%	2.6%	$147M	$1.0B
Early-stage total	63.6%	64.1%	—	—
Unknown stage	12.1%	5.1%	—	—

Are quantum companies coming back for money faster?

Not really. Quantum companies are raising repeatedly more often, but the available timing data do not show a clear acceleration in fundraising cycles.

We matched companies to their immediately preceding financing wherever the public record gave us enough information. Among 25 usable current cases, the median gap was six months, compared with 4.8 months across nine usable previous cases.

There is one interesting difference underneath that median. Eighty-four percent of recent repeat financings occurred within 12 months, versus 55.6% in the smaller comparison sample. We also found ten companies raising more than once during the current period, double the previous five.

So repeat fundraising is clearly more common these days. The claim that companies are returning to market faster is much harder to defend, especially with only nine usable timing observations in the older period.

Do quantum startups need more proof before investors will fund them?

We cannot see evidence of a broad increase in the proof required to raise quantum funding.

The deal record does not contain consistent public information on revenue, customers, technical benchmarks or commercial milestones for every company, so we would be forcing the conclusion if we claimed that the funding bar has universally moved higher.

What we can measure points in a different direction. Funded companies are slightly younger, first financings are larger, and newly created companies such as Oratomic can still attract enormous early rounds when investors believe the technical case is strong.

Large checks do increasingly come with very concrete execution plans. QuantWare is building manufacturing capacity. OQC is expanding deployed infrastructure. Quantum Motion says its $160 million Series C will commercialize its silicon-based architecture. Quobly's financing is tied to industrialization and an initial commercial product.

For now, investors seem willing to fund technical risk early, but they want the biggest checks tied to a believable path toward an actual machine, production capability or deployment.

Is quantum funding moving from research into industrial build-out?

Yes. At the top of the market, quantum funding is increasingly paying for factories, deployed systems, manufacturing processes and fault-tolerant machines.

QuantWare's $178 million Series B funds KiloFab and a roughly twentyfold increase in production capacity. OQC's $350 million Series C is meant to expand deployed systems and its international infrastructure. Quobly's €115 million round supports R&D, industrialization and international commercial expansion.

SpinQ offers another recent example. Its RMB 600 million Series C+ round was aimed at next-generation superconducting chips and standardized production lines, followed by a RMB 1 billion Series D to advance fault-tolerant systems, manufacturing processes and commercialization.

Even companies following a more research-heavy path are raising at industrial scale. Oratomic says its $300 million Series A is dedicated to building a fault-tolerant quantum computer, without pursuing intermediate products along the way.

A very recent adjacent signal comes from PsiQuantum. The company finalized a $100 million U.S. Department of Commerce R&D award to advance domestic manufacturing of critical quantum components. We exclude that award from our private-equity funding totals, but it reinforces the same direction: quantum computing is moving deeper into manufacturing and infrastructure.

We still cannot put a clean percentage on "R&D versus scaling" because companies do not disclose use of funds in a standardized way. The company announcements are nevertheless much more physical than they were a few years ago.

Why is China suddenly responsible for so many quantum computing deals?

China has become the biggest source of new quantum deal activity, and the country's policy push is now impossible to ignore.

Chinese companies accounted for 26 deals during the latest 12 months, up from only three. China's share of all transactions went from 7.7% to 39.4%, helping Asia-Pacific jump from 10 deals to 31.

The policy backdrop has become much more explicit. China's 2026 government work programme places quantum technology among the country's "industries of the future." The 2026–2030 planning framework also calls for quantum technology to become a new source of economic growth.

That direction is still being reinforced. A Jiangsu government response published in 2026 describes efforts to channel government funds, insurance money, patient capital and other financing toward quantum and frontier technologies. It specifically discusses supporting young quantum companies through longer-term capital.

Company activity fits that backdrop. SpinQ raised RMB 600 million in a Series C+ round and then RMB 1 billion in Series D within a few months. QBoson raised roughly $145 million in Series B and returned to the market again later in the year.

We should still be careful with the dollar totals. Many Chinese rounds are disclosed only as "tens of millions" or "hundreds of millions" of RMB, so the deal-count boom is much easier to measure precisely than the amount of capital behind it.

Did European quantum funding surge while North America fell?

Europe clearly raised much more quantum capital, while North America's apparent drop is mostly a comparison problem created by last year's giant rounds.

Europe went from 12 to 20 deals, but the bigger change was money: disclosed capital rose from $547 million to about $1.23 billion. OQC, QuantWare, Quantum Motion and Quobly alone account for several hundred million dollars of current financing.

The European policy environment lines up closely with that shift. The European Commission's Quantum Europe Strategy puts startup and scale-up investment, industrialization, supply chains and scalable infrastructure at the heart of its plan. In 2026, the Commission was still explicitly talking about moving quantum technology from scientific excellence into commercial applications and deployment.

North America looks very different if we move beyond the headline total. Deal count stayed at 11, while the median known financing increased from roughly $22 million to $34 million. Capital fell mainly because the older period contained PsiQuantum's $1 billion financing and Quantinuum's roughly $600 million raise.

The geographic map has therefore changed, but "Europe up, North America down" is too crude. Europe really did gain capital intensity. North America mostly lost an extraordinary concentration of megadeals.

Are more investors entering quantum computing?

More identifiable investors are now leading quantum deals, although corporate investors are appearing in a smaller share of transactions.

We counted 68 unique named lead investors in the latest period versus 45 previously. That broader investor base has grown alongside the number of funded companies, which reduces the sense that the market is controlled by a tiny circle of specialist funds.

Strategic-investor participation moved the other way, falling from 28.2% of deals to 22.7%. Yet the strategic-backed rounds that do happen are larger: their median disclosed financing increased from $107 million to $130 million.

Hardware dominates this group. Eleven of the 15 recent deals with identified strategic participation involve Quantum Hardware Systems. Quobly, for example, brought in industrial investors including STMicroelectronics, SEALSQ and Air Liquide's venture arm alongside financial investors.

Corporate money currently looks more targeted than ubiquitous. Strategic investors are concentrating on areas where their manufacturing, semiconductor, infrastructure or customer relationships can actually matter.

What should we be most careful about in the quantum funding numbers?

The biggest weakness in current quantum funding data is disclosure quality, especially in China.

Only 65.2% of recent deals give us a usable exact or approximate amount, compared with 82.1% in the previous period. Eighteen current rounds have no precise amount, while five others give only a lower bound.

That makes deal count, company count and category breadth more reliable than exact capital totals in some geographies. It also means the $3.03 billion current total is incomplete by construction.

We are especially cautious with Chinese financing. When a company says it raised "hundreds of millions of RMB," we count the financing but do not invent a precise USD value. The same rule applies when reports disagree on whether an amount represents a new round, an extension or a cumulative total.

This also explains why some metrics that use only known-size rounds should be read differently from simple deal counts. Our goal is to preserve uncertainty rather than make the market look cleaner than the public evidence allows.

What really changed over the last 12 months?

Quantum computing funding has become broader. More companies raised money, transaction activity increased sharply, and the market is much less dependent on its three largest rounds.

Typical checks have also moved up. A much thicker layer of companies can now raise tens or hundreds of millions of dollars, even when they still carry Seed or Series A labels.

Hardware has taken a commanding share of investor attention. The biggest new rounds increasingly fund processors, fabrication capacity, complete machines and deployed infrastructure, while software and middleware have not matched that pace.

New-company formation remains healthy alongside the scaling of existing winners. Investors are writing larger first checks without abandoning follow-ons, and the funded-company population has become slightly younger.

China is driving a huge part of the increase in deal breadth, while Europe has become much more capital-intensive. North America's headline decline looks far less dramatic once the previous period's billion-dollar outliers are removed.

The misleading takeaway would be that quantum funding grew by only 15%. That number is technically correct for disclosed capital, but it misses almost every structural change that made the latest 12 months more interesting.