Quantum Computing Funding Tracker (126 deals)

Our funding tracker covering the quantum computing market

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

And, if you want to gain a deeper understanding of the market and its current dynamics, get our report on quantum computing funding, valuations and who's ahead.

Is quantum computing really a $6.5 billion funding market right now?

Quantum computing funding really does add up to at least about $6.54 billion in our research window, but a normal company in this market is raising nowhere near that headline scale.

We tracked 126 financings across 87 companies. We could put a usable single-number capital figure on 104 of those rounds, while 22 remained undisclosed or could not be reduced to one reliable figure. That means the $6.54 billion total is best read as observed minimum capital rather than an exact market total.

The typical round gives a much better feel for the market. The median disclosed financing is $21.16 million, compared with an average of $62.88 million. A few huge checks pull that average far above what most companies receive.

The difference becomes even clearer when we strip out the biggest rounds. Capital falls to about $1.80 billion once financings above $100 million are removed, and to $1.26 billion when we exclude rounds above $50 million.

So yes, this is a multibillion-dollar funding market today. Most of that money, though, sits far above the financing level experienced by the typical quantum company.

Metric	Result
Financings	126
Unique companies	87
Rounds with usable capital figures	104
Known/minimum capital	$6.539B
Capital excluding rounds >$100M	$1.799B
Capital excluding rounds >$50M	$1.257B
Median disclosed round	$21.16M
Average disclosed round	$62.88M
Average / median	2.97×

How many quantum computing companies are actually getting funded?

We found 87 quantum computing companies behind those 126 financings, and nearly three-quarters of them appear only once during the period.

Sixty-three companies raised a single qualifying round. Twelve raised twice, and another 12 raised at least three times.

That leaves only 24 companies, or 27.6% of the cohort, coming back for another round during our window. Yet those repeat fundraisers collected roughly $3.83 billion, equal to 58.6% of observed capital.

This makes the market feel smaller once we move from press releases to companies. There is a fairly broad group that can secure one institutional financing, followed by a much tighter core that keeps clearing the next funding hurdle.

The observation window matters here. A startup that raised for the first time recently may simply have had no reason or time to return yet. Even with that caveat, 87 companies is the more useful number to keep in mind when trying to understand how large the private quantum funding ecosystem actually is.

Is quantum computing funding concentrated in just a handful of companies?

Quantum computing funding is heavily concentrated: the ten best-funded companies account for 62.2% of all the capital we could quantify.

The largest company alone represents 16.8% of observed capital, while the top five reach 47.3%. That concentration comes from repeated funding as well as giant individual rounds.

Quantinuum raised roughly $1.10 billion across three qualifying financings. PsiQuantum reached about $1.02 billion across two. Oxford Quantum Circuits added $350 million, IQM Quantum Computers $320 million and Oratomic $300 million.

There is still a meaningful layer below the leaders. At least 29 of the 87 companies have more than $50 million in cumulative known capital during the period.

But once companies start approaching several hundred million dollars, the field gets thin very quickly. Today, only two companies in our cohort cross $1 billion of observed funding, and together they account for close to one-third of the market.

What does a normal quantum computing funding round look like?

For a typical quantum computing startup, a financing in the tens of millions is far more normal than the nine-figure rounds that dominate the headlines.

The median disclosed round is about $21 million. Twenty-two financings came in below $5 million, another 29 between $5 million and $20 million, and 26 between $20 million and $50 million.

Put together, 77 of the 104 quantifiable rounds are below $50 million. With most rounds under $50 million, the nine-figure ones stand out; we follow where the biggest rounds are going in our quantum computing funding report.

Those 77 transactions account for about $1.26 billion. The other 27 rounds above $50 million absorb more than $5.28 billion.

The pattern gets even more extreme at $100 million. Only around one-fifth of disclosed rounds cross that threshold, but they represent roughly three-quarters of all observed capital.

For founders and investors, the $21 million median is therefore more useful than the $63 million average. Nine-figure financing is clearly possible in quantum computing these days, but it belongs to a relatively small part of the market.

Which quantum computing companies have raised the most money?

Quantinuum and PsiQuantum sit in a funding class of their own, with roughly $1.1 billion and $1.02 billion respectively during our research window.

After those two, the numbers fall sharply. Oxford Quantum Circuits raised $350 million, IQM Quantum Computers $320 million and Oratomic $300 million.

Several recent rounds show how much serious capital is now available to companies that investors believe can scale. QuantWare raised $178 million, Quantum Motion raised $160 million, and Quantum Machines sits at $150 million in our window.

Those companies also show that there is more than one route into the top tier. The list includes full quantum-computer builders, processor companies and control-infrastructure providers.

Even so, hardware-related businesses dominate the top of the ranking. That becomes much easier to understand when we look at what these companies are actually trying to build.

Company	Qualifying rounds	Known/minimum capital
Quantinuum	3	$1.100B
PsiQuantum	2	$1.022B
Oxford Quantum Circuits	1	$350M
IQM Quantum Computers	1	$320M
Oratomic	1	$300M
SpinQ	4	≥$262.2M + one undisclosed
QuantWare	3	$203.6M
Pasqal	1	≈$198M
Quantum Motion	1	$160M
Quantum Machines	1	$150M

Why is quantum hardware getting so much more money than everything else?

Quantum hardware takes 82.1% of the capital we tracked because building a serious quantum computer is becoming an industrial-scale engineering project.

Hardware Systems account for 73 of the 126 deals, about 58% of activity, yet they absorb roughly $5.37 billion. Their share of the money is therefore much larger than their share of financings.

The checks are larger too. The median hardware financing is $29.9 million, compared with $17.6 million for Quantum Programming Software, $13.8 million for Components and $3.5 million for Middleware.

The use of that money explains most of the gap. PsiQuantum has linked its $1 billion financing to utility-scale sites, large prototype systems, photonic chips and the infrastructure around them. IQM said its $320 million Series B would support wider production and its error-correction roadmap. QuantWare's recent $178 million round is tied to industrial processor production and its KiloFab manufacturing facility.

The pattern has become even more visible lately. OQC closed a $350 million Series C, Oratomic announced a $300 million Series A, and Quantum Motion raised $160 million to scale its silicon-based approach.

At that stage, investors are funding factories, fabrication, control systems, cryogenics, deployment sites and years of hardware development. The capital needs are simply much bigger than for most software businesses in the same market.

Are quantum software and component companies actually getting funded?

Quantum software and component companies are getting funded, but their funding market is much shallower than the hardware market today.

Quantum Computing Components produced 25 deals across 22 companies and about $534 million of observed capital. Quantum Programming Software added 13 deals and roughly $340 million, while Middleware generated another 13 deals and around $278 million.

Programming software looks the most mature of those groups. We count six Seed or Series A rounds and seven later-stage financings, giving it a much more balanced funding ladder than the other non-hardware categories. Software has a more balanced funding ladder than the other non-hardware groups, and we compare which business models are winning in our quantum computing market report.

Components have plenty of companies but very little later-stage activity. Twenty-one of the 25 component deals are Seed or Series A, with only two reaching Series B or beyond.

Middleware is similarly young, with 11 of 13 rounds at Seed or Series A. Its headline capital figure also gets a big lift from one transaction: Quantum Machines alone represents more than half of the category's funding.

So there is real money outside full hardware systems. The difference is scale. We still see very few non-hardware companies reaching the repeated $100 million-plus financing level that has become possible for the strongest system builders.

Where does quantum computing funding get really difficult?

Quantum computing funding gets much harder after Series A, when the number of rounds drops from 39 Series A financings to only 15 Series B rounds.

That is the first obvious break in the funding ladder. At the same time, the median check rises from $22.9 million at Series A to $50 million at Series B.

The companies trying to cross that gap therefore face two problems at once: fewer rounds are available, and each one requires investors to commit substantially more capital.

After that, 15 Series B rounds become ten Series C financings. Only two Series D+ rounds appear in the entire cohort.

The size of those later checks shows why the field narrows so hard. The median Series C financing is $110 million. The two D+ rounds average $573.5 million.

Quantum companies can clearly find money to start and build an early technical platform. The hard part is showing enough technical progress, manufacturability and commercial credibility to make a $50 million, $100 million or larger next round look sensible.

Stage	Deals	Companies	Capital	Median round
Seed	41	37	$326.0M	$4.6M
Series A	39	32	$1.512B	$22.9M
Series B	15	13	$1.800B	$50.0M
Series C	10	7	$1.032B	$110.0M
Series D+	2	2	$1.147B	$573.5M
Growth Equity	5	5	$348.0M	$70.0M
Unknown	14	13	$374.9M	$17.9M

How old are quantum computing companies before investors write really big checks?

The biggest quantum computing checks usually arrive after years of technical development: companies raising more than $50 million have a median age of seven years.

Companies raising below $5 million have a median age of just one year.

The progression by stage is remarkably clean. The median Seed company is one year old at financing. Series A moves to three years, Series B to six and Series C to eight.

That fits the reality of this market. Quantum companies often need years to improve fidelity, solve manufacturing problems, develop control systems, demonstrate error correction and convince customers or industrial partners that the technology is moving beyond laboratory work.

The age data also helps explain why a $100 million quantum round can arrive much later than a large round in software. Investors are often financing a technical program that has already been running for most of a decade.

The biggest checks are going to companies that have had time to accumulate much more than an interesting scientific idea.

Is quantum computing still creating new startups, or are investors mostly funding existing winners?

Quantum computing is still producing new startups, while most of the money currently flows back into companies that investors already know.

Twenty-nine of the 87 companies we tracked were founded from 2024 through 2026. That is one-third of the whole company cohort, so new company formation is still very much alive.

Funding dollars tell a different story. Follow-on financings account for 95 of the 126 deals and about $5.76 billion of observed capital. First financings account for 31 deals and roughly $783 million. With follow-ons taking about $5.76 billion, we look at who the likely future winners are in our quantum computing funding report.

The check sizes make the gap even clearer. A first financing has a median size of $4.5 million, compared with $26.6 million for a follow-on.

That combination makes sense for a technically demanding market. New teams can still enter with relatively modest rounds, while the older companies that have already cleared one or more technical milestones are the ones absorbing the biggest checks.

Only 24 companies raised more than once during the period, yet that group collected the majority of observed capital. Quantum keeps creating new entrants, but the financial center of gravity sits with the companies that continue to survive the next technical test.

Which regions are getting the most quantum computing funding?

North America gets almost half of disclosed quantum computing capital even though Asia-Pacific has far more financing events.

North America accounts for 28 deals and approximately $3.14 billion, or 48% of the capital we could quantify. Asia-Pacific leads deal count with 47 financings but has only about $920 million of numerically captured capital. Europe sits in between with 39 deals and roughly $1.93 billion.

The U.S. drives most of the North American number. We count 26 U.S. deals representing about $2.98 billion of observed capital.

China creates the opposite problem. It has 32 financings in our dataset, but a large share of Chinese rounds are undisclosed or reported through vague RMB ranges. Any direct dollar comparison therefore understates how much capital is actually moving through China.

That disclosure gap is large enough that we would be careful about declaring one region structurally underfunded from capital totals alone.

What we can say more confidently is that large checks now exist across every major region in our research. The difference is how often they happen and how clearly the amounts are disclosed.

Which investors keep coming back to quantum computing?

No small group of venture firms controls quantum computing funding: we identified 127 different disclosed lead or co-lead names, and only ten led more than one deal.

Quantonation stands out with four lead or co-lead appearances. Everyone else among the recurring leaders appears twice.

The mix is unusually broad. We see specialist quantum investors, conventional venture firms, growth investors, sovereign or state-backed institutions and investors tied closely to national deep-tech strategies.

ARCH Venture Partners appears on larger rounds totaling $360 million. Bpifrance's two led or co-led rounds total $237.5 million. Planet First Partners reaches $205 million across two deals. Sequoia Capital appears twice as well, but on smaller combined financing volume.

This fragmentation changes the fundraising picture for founders. There is no five-firm list that explains the whole quantum market. The relevant investor pool depends heavily on stage, architecture, country and how close the company is getting to industrial deployment.

Lead/co-lead investor	Deals led/co-led	Combined size of those rounds
Quantonation	4	$73.5M
ARCH Venture Partners	2	$360M
Bpifrance	2	$237.5M
Planet First Partners	2	$205M
Bedford Ridge Capital	2	$140M
Sequoia Capital	2	$86.6M
Invest-NL Deep Tech Fund	2	$47.1M
IDG Capital	2	≥$44M
Puhua Capital	2	≥$14.4M
Lifeline Ventures	2	$5.5M

Do corporate and strategic investors really matter in quantum computing?

Strategic investors matter a lot once quantum computing companies start raising serious money: rounds with a strategic backer have a median size of $104 million.

The comparable median without strategic participation is $14.6 million.

Strategic investors appear in only 32 of the 126 financings, so they are far from universal. Their presence becomes much more common around the larger hardware rounds.

Hardware alone accounts for 20 of those 32 strategic-backed transactions. Intel Capital appears in three deals, while IonQ, NVentures, Amgen and Honeywell each appear twice.

The company examples make the pattern easy to understand. Quantinuum's large financing included Honeywell, Quanta, NVentures, JPMorganChase, Mitsui and Amgen. Industrial and corporate investors have clear reasons to care about computing infrastructure, semiconductors, pharmaceuticals and future enterprise workloads.

A sevenfold median-round gap does not prove that strategic investors themselves create larger financings. Mature hardware companies naturally attract both bigger checks and more industrial partners.

Still, the association is too large to shrug off. Once quantum companies move toward manufacturing and deployment, strategic capital becomes a much more visible part of the funding mix.

Is quantum computing deal activity actually picking up now?

Quantum computing deal activity is clearly busier now than it was earlier in our research window, even though monthly funding totals remain wildly uneven.

Across the 32 completed months we studied, the median month produced three financings. More recently, April reached nine deals, while July and August each produced eight.

The first half of 2024 had 12 financings. The first half of 2025 had 15. The first half of 2026 reached 32. Deal counts more than doubling between first halves is a big change, and we follow what else has shifted over the past year in our report on quantum computing.

That is a real increase in activity rather than one giant deal making the market look busy.

Dollar totals behave very differently. The median completed month contains about $65.8 million of known capital, while the average is roughly $201.6 million. One exceptional month reached just over $2 billion with only six deals because several huge rounds landed together.

April 2026 offers the reverse example. It was the busiest month by deal count with nine financings, yet capital came to only about $317 million.

Deal flow has become much denser lately. Capital still arrives in bursts whenever one of the industry's biggest companies closes a nine- or ten-figure round.

What is the biggest weakness in quantum computing funding today?

The biggest weakness in quantum computing funding today is the thin group of companies that make it from a funded early technical platform to a heavily financed scale-up business.

The early funnel looks healthy. Seed and Series A together produce 80 classified financings.

The pressure shows up immediately afterward. Only 15 Series B rounds appear, and outside Hardware Systems the later-stage population gets especially small.

Components are a good example. The category contains 22 companies and 25 deals, so there is plenty of experimentation. Yet 21 of those financings sit at Seed or Series A.

Middleware has a similar shape, with 11 of 13 rounds at the early stages.

Investors are willing to fund quantum ideas, teams and early systems. Far fewer companies persuade them to keep financing the technical journey once checks move toward $50 million and beyond.

That is the central dividing line in this market. The companies that repeatedly clear those larger engineering and financing hurdles end up absorbing an enormous share of all available capital.

What should we actually take away from quantum computing funding?

Quantum computing funding today is a large market in dollar terms, but the everyday financing environment is much smaller than the $6.54 billion headline suggests.

We found 87 companies behind 126 financings, and only 24 raised more than once during the period. Those repeat fundraisers still captured most of the observed capital, which tells us how quickly the market narrows after the first institutional check.

Hardware sits at the center of the whole funding story. It represents about 58% of deals but 82% of capital, with the biggest rounds increasingly paying for manufacturing, system integration, processors, control infrastructure and the long road toward fault-tolerant machines.

Early-stage money is widely available by quantum standards. Series B is where the financing ladder becomes much harder, just as the median required check moves toward $50 million.

Strategic investors become far more visible around those larger rounds, while lead-investor activity remains surprisingly fragmented. There is plenty of capital in quantum computing, but there is no single investor group holding the whole ecosystem together.

Deal frequency has also increased noticeably lately. The bigger question now is how many of those funded companies can progress far enough to join the small group capable of raising $100 million, $300 million or eventually $1 billion.