Quantum Computing: where's the money now?
In our quantum computing market deck, you will find everything you need to understand the market
SUMMARY
Quantum Computing: where's the money now? The money is currently going to the quantum categories that make scale, financing, or near-term usefulness feel believable before fault-tolerant machines fully arrive.
The clearest pattern is that investors are no longer just funding “more qubits.” They are funding credible scale paths: photonics, silicon manufacturing, distributed architectures, control infrastructure, error correction, and full-stack platforms with enough capital to survive the long race.
Full-stack platforms still sit at the top because they give investors the cleanest upside story. Quantinuum, IonQ, and D-Wave each show a different version of that story: IPO access, acquisition currency, and early revenue growth.
Photonics is probably the strongest architecture-level funding signal right now. PsiQuantum’s $1B raise and Photonic’s $200M-plus round show that investors like quantum stories that sound adjacent to chips, optics, networks, fabs, and data centers.
Silicon quantum computing looks like the freshest money pocket. The attraction is obvious: if quantum can borrow the language of transistors, CMOS, semiconductor supply chains, and energy efficiency, it becomes easier for investors and industrial partners to underwrite.
Distributed quantum computing is becoming a serious scaling hedge. The market is starting to price the possibility that the future quantum computer may be modular and networked, rather than one giant machine that solves scaling alone.
Quantum control and hardware infrastructure may be the safest category inside the stack. These companies can sell into many hardware modalities, which means they do not need to correctly predict whether trapped ions, photonics, silicon, superconducting, or neutral atoms ultimately win.
Neutral atoms, trapped ions, and superconducting systems are all still funded, but the bar is becoming more selective. Investors want deployment signals, manufacturing paths, infrastructure packaging, or logical-qubit economics rather than pure scientific promise.
Error correction is becoming one of the most important conviction signals. The market is moving from physical-qubit theater toward useful operations, logical qubits, and the middleware needed to make noisy systems commercially relevant.
Quantum software and algorithms are still investable, but only when they look like tooling for the whole development cycle. The strongest software stories are hardware-agnostic, enterprise-facing, or strategically connected to hardware and semiconductor players.
Post-quantum cybersecurity belongs in the money map, but it should not be confused with quantum computing hardware. It is getting funded because the budget problem exists today: enterprises and governments can start migrating security systems long before quantum computers create direct computational value.
All things considered, the money is not evenly spread across quantum computing. It is concentrating around categories that reduce the market’s biggest fear: that quantum remains technically impressive but commercially too slow, too expensive, or too hard to scale.
This market map, featured in our quantum computing market deck, highlights top companies and startups in the quantum computing market
What are the company categories in quantum computing?
Before asking where the money is going, we need to separate the market into the right buckets.
“Quantum computing” sounds like one category, but it is really a stack of very different company types: some build processors, some build the control layer, some build networking, and some sell software or security tools around the future quantum stack.
| Category | Concise description | Example companies |
|---|---|---|
| Full-stack quantum platforms | Companies trying to own the full machine: hardware, software, cloud access, enterprise relationships, and long-term fault-tolerant roadmaps. | Quantinuum, IonQ, D-Wave, Rigetti |
| Photonic quantum computing | Companies using light/photons as qubits, often with a scale story tied to chips, optics, telecom, and data-center-style infrastructure. | PsiQuantum, Xanadu, Quandela, ORCA Computing |
| Neutral-atom quantum computing | Companies using laser-controlled atoms, usually pitching scale, flexibility, and a strong path for simulation and fault-tolerance. | QuEra, Atom Computing, Pasqal, Infleqtion |
| Silicon / semiconductor quantum computing | Companies trying to build quantum computers with silicon, CMOS, spin qubits, or semiconductor manufacturing logic. | Quantum Motion, Quobly, Equal1, Diraq, Silicon Quantum Computing |
| Trapped-ion quantum computing | Companies using trapped ions, usually betting on very high fidelity, long coherence, and cleaner logical-qubit paths. | Quantinuum, IonQ, Oxford Ionics, Quantum Art |
| Superconducting quantum computing | Companies using superconducting circuits, the architecture associated with IBM, Google, Rigetti, OQC, and several early cloud systems. | OQC, Rigetti, IQM, IBM Quantum, Google Quantum AI |
| Distributed quantum computing and interconnects | Companies building the links between quantum processors, so scale can come from connected modules rather than one giant machine. | Photonic, Nu Quantum, Lightsynq, Qubitekk |
| Quantum control and hardware infrastructure | Companies selling the electronics, orchestration, control software, cryogenic tools, and hardware stack that quantum builders need. | Quantum Machines, Q-CTRL, Bluefors, Zurich Instruments |
| Quantum error correction and fault-tolerance middleware | Companies working on the layer that turns noisy physical qubits into reliable logical operations. | Riverlane, Nord Quantique, Alice & Bob, Q-CTRL |
| Quantum software, algorithms, and application tooling | Companies helping users design circuits, build algorithms, test applications, or run workloads across different quantum machines. | Classiq, Phasecraft, Horizon Quantum Computing, Multiverse Computing |
| Post-quantum cybersecurity | Companies helping governments and enterprises prepare for future quantum attacks on today’s cryptography. | SandboxAQ, PQShield, QuSecure, evolutionQ |
Is money flowing into full-stack quantum platforms right now?
Yes. In full-stack quantum platforms, the money is currently going to companies that look big enough to survive the whole long race.
The cleanest signal is Quantinuum. In September 2025, it raised about $600M at a $10B pre-money valuation. That valuation had roughly doubled from its previous reported level, which matters more than the headline amount. It tells us investors were willing to pay up again, not just keep the company alive. The investor list also mattered: Nvidia’s venture arm, Quanta Computer, QED, JPMorganChase, Mitsui, Amgen, and Honeywell were all in the round.
Then Quantinuum went public in June 2026 and raised $1.68B in an upsized IPO. The implied valuation was around $15B to $16B, even though the company was still pre-profit. That is a strong “public markets are open for the right quantum story” signal. The stock did not explode after listing, which actually makes the signal cleaner: investors did not blindly chase the IPO, but they still allowed a dedicated quantum company to raise serious public capital.
IonQ shows a different version of the same idea. It used public-market currency to buy pieces of the stack, including Oxford Ionics in a roughly $1.075B mostly stock deal. That is not a normal startup tuck-in but an actual public quantum company using its equity to buy a technical path toward miniaturized trapped-ion systems.
D-Wave adds the commercial proof point. In 2025, it reported $24.6M in revenue, up 179% year over year, and ended the year with $884.5M in cash and marketable securities. The revenue base is still small for a public company, but the combination of triple-digit growth and nearly 4x cash expansion shows why public investors have not abandoned the category.
At the end of the day, full-stack platforms are getting funded because they give investors one simple story: if quantum becomes real, these companies want to own the customer, the machine, and the roadmap.
That is expensive, but right now the market still seems willing to fund it.
If you want more recent data on this point, please see our latest quantum computing market report.
As this chart shows, and as featured in our quantum computing market deck, search interest in quantum computing has grown significantly
Is money flowing into photonic quantum computing right now?
Yes. Photonic quantum computing is one of the clearest places where money is flowing right now.
PsiQuantum is the obvious anchor. In September 2025, it raised $1B at a $7B valuation. A $1B private round is already rare in deeptech, but the more interesting part is who joined: BlackRock, Temasek, Baillie Gifford, and Nvidia’s venture arm. That mix says the category is not only attracting quantum specialists. It is also pulling in late-stage, sovereign, crossover, and AI-adjacent capital.
The valuation is also important. A $7B value for a company still building toward utility-scale machines means investors are not paying for current revenue but for the actual possibility that PsiQuantum’s photonic route can skip the “small machine” trap and go straight toward large fault-tolerant systems.
That is a very specific bet on architecture, not a generic bet on quantum hype.
Photonic Inc. gives the second signal, and it is less obvious. In May 2026, it closed more than $200M at a $2B post-money valuation. The company talks about distributed quantum computing, but its photonic architecture is part of why the story works: photons are natural carriers for connecting systems. So the money is backing both a qubit approach and a scaling model.
Xanadu adds a public-market angle. Its planned public-market path gave investors another way to play photonic quantum, with a reported multi-billion-dollar valuation. That matters because photonics now has more than one fundable story: the billion-dollar private mega-round, the distributed-computing growth round, and the public-market vehicle.
So it looks like photonics is currently getting funded because it translates quantum into a language investors already understand: chips, optics, networking, fabs, and data centers.
Is money flowing into neutral-atom quantum computing right now?
Yes, but neutral-atom quantum money is more selective than photonics money.
QuEra is the main venture signal. Its $230M Series B, later expanded with Nvidia’s venture arm, showed that investors like neutral atoms when the company can connect the story to hybrid quantum-classical computing and accelerated infrastructure. The Nvidia link is important. It suggests the market is starting to see neutral atoms as something that may sit next to HPC and AI systems, not as a standalone science project.
Atom Computing is the stronger public-funding signal. In May 2026, the U.S. Department of Commerce announced a letter of intent for $100M in planned funding to help Atom Computing scale neutral-atom systems. The wording matters: the money was aimed at technical and manufacturing challenges, including manipulating and validating tens of thousands of qubits. That is exactly the stage where neutral atoms need help: not proving the physics, but industrializing the machine.
Pasqal adds a deployment signal. Its 200-qubit neutral-atom system with Aramco in Saudi Arabia shows that neutral atoms are already being placed into industrial and sovereign environments. That does not prove broad quantum advantage today, but it does prove buyers are willing to host real systems, not just run cloud experiments.
The category also benefits from the broader benchmarking wave. Neutral-atom players like Atom Computing and QuEra advanced into DARPA’s Quantum Benchmarking Initiative Stage B, where the U.S. government is testing whether architectures can plausibly reach utility-scale operation by 2033. That kind of validation is valuable because it filters real contenders from pitch-deck noise.
Neutral atoms are getting real money, but the bar is high.
This chart, included in our quantum computing market deck, illustrates yearly VC funding for quantum computing startups
Is money flowing into silicon / semiconductor quantum computing right now?
Yes. Silicon quantum computing is probably the freshest money signal in the market today.
Quantum Motion raised $160M in May 2026 for silicon transistor-based quantum computing. That round came only a few years after its previous large raise, so the pace matters. Investors were willing to re-underwrite the company quickly because the story maps onto something they already know: transistors, CMOS-like manufacturing, energy efficiency, and industrial scale.
The company also put numbers on the pitch: it says its architecture can reduce cost and space by 100x and energy use by 1,000x versus some non-silicon approaches. Those claims still need to be proven at scale, but they explain why the money is moving. In a world already worried about AI data-center energy demand, a quantum architecture that sounds cheaper, smaller, and less power-hungry is very fundable.
Quobly is the sharper early-stage signal. In June 2026, it raised €115M in a Series A. That is abnormally large for a Series A in almost any market, and especially in quantum hardware. The investor mix makes it more interesting: Bpifrance, STMicroelectronics, SEALSQ, and the European Innovation Council are not just financial tourists. They point to industrialization, chip supply chains, and European sovereignty.
Equal1 adds the packaging signal. Its $60M January 2026 raise came with a rack-mounted quantum-classical system shown with Dell. That matters because enterprise buyers understand racks much better than they understand dilution refrigerators and lab benches. The company is trying to make quantum look like something that can eventually fit into normal computing infrastructure.
If you want more recent data on this point, please see our latest quantum computing market report.
Is money flowing into trapped-ion quantum computing right now?
Yes. Trapped-ion quantum computing still has strong money behind it, but the money is concentrating around platform control and miniaturization.
Quantinuum is the biggest proof. Its 2025 private raise and 2026 IPO made a trapped-ion-led full-stack company one of the most capitalized players in quantum. The key signal is not only the amount raised. It is the sequence: large private round, valuation step-up, strategic investors, then a traditional IPO within roughly nine months. That is a rare capital-market progression for a quantum company.
IonQ’s Oxford Ionics acquisition is the second signal. A $1.075B mostly stock deal for ion-trap-on-chip technology tells us where IonQ thinks the bottleneck is. The company is buying a way to make trapped-ion systems smaller, more manufacturable, and easier to scale.
Quantum Art gives a challenger signal. It raised $100M in late 2025 with a roadmap toward 1,000 physical qubits and 100 logical qubits by 2027. That kind of roadmap is aggressive, but the funding shows investors still believe trapped ions can produce high-quality logical qubits if the engineering catches up.
The category has one subtle weakness: the strongest trapped-ion signals are now tied to bigger platform stories. Standalone trapped-ion hardware companies need to explain not only fidelity, but packaging, manufacturing, cloud access, and logical-qubit economics.
So, trapped ions still attract money because the quality story is easy to understand.
This chart, included in our quantum computing market deck, looks at IonQ’s strategy in quantum computing
Is money flowing into superconducting quantum computing right now?
Yes, but superconducting quantum computing is not getting money evenly.
OQC is the strongest fresh signal. In June 2026, it raised £260M, roughly $350M, in an oversubscribed Series C. It was described as the largest private quantum computing round in Europe. That is a big deal for superconducting hardware because this architecture already has giant competitors like IBM and Google. For a startup to raise that much, it needs a sharper angle than “we also build superconducting qubits.”
OQC’s angle is infrastructure. The company talks about scaling quantum data-center access and pushing systems closer to enterprise and sovereign users. That makes the round easier to understand: investors are backing superconducting hardware when it comes packaged as infrastructure, not just another lab machine.
Rigetti shows the harder side of the category. It remains public and technically active, but its revenue and loss profile still make investors cautious. This is where superconducting quantum looks different from silicon or photonics. The modality is technically validated by giants, but that also makes the startup bar brutal.
IBM and Google keep the architecture relevant without needing venture funding. Their work gives superconducting systems credibility, but it also means smaller companies need to prove why they deserve independent capital. In today’s market, that usually means geography, cloud access, a system-level product, or a very specific scaling breakthrough.
So superconducting quantum is still getting funded, but investors are much more selective now.
Is money flowing into distributed quantum computing and interconnects right now?
Yes. Distributed quantum computing is one of the more interesting money pockets right now because it is a bet on how quantum systems may actually scale.
Photonic Inc. is the biggest signal here. In May 2026, it closed more than $200M at a $2B post-money valuation, with total capital raised above $350M. That valuation is high for a company in such a technical layer. It suggests investors are treating distributed quantum as a core scaling strategy.
Nu Quantum is the cleaner category signal. Its $60M Series A in December 2025 was described as the largest financing round for quantum computer networking. A $60M Series A is already large, but the investor mix makes it more telling: National Grid Partners led, and Sumitomo’s Presidio Ventures, NSSIF, Amadeus, IQ Capital, and Ahren were involved. That is infrastructure, strategic, sovereign-linked, and deeptech money converging on the same layer.
IonQ’s acquisition pattern points in the same direction. It bought or moved into companies around quantum networking, secure communication, and adjacent infrastructure, including Qubitekk, ID Quantique, Lightsynq, and Capella Space. As seen above, IonQ also spent heavily on Oxford Ionics, but the broader pattern is clear: one of the public quantum platforms is trying to own more than the processor.
The important interpretation is that distributed quantum is becoming a hedge against monolithic scaling. If one chip or one trap cannot scale fast enough, investors want the layer that connects many systems together.
At the end of the day, interconnects are getting funded because they make quantum scale feel less binary. The category wins if the future machine is modular, networked, or distributed, and right now that possibility looks very alive.
If you want more recent data on this point, please see our latest quantum computing market report.
This chart, included in our quantum computing market deck, illustrates yearly funding for quantum computing startups
Is money flowing into quantum control and hardware infrastructure right now?
Yes. Quantum control and infrastructure may be one of the safest places to put money inside quantum computing right now.
Quantum Machines is the main proof. In February 2025, it raised $170M in a Series C, bringing total funding to $280M. The important signal is its customer base: the company says its technology is used by more than half of the companies developing quantum computers. That changes the risk profile. Quantum Machines does not need to know which qubit modality wins; it sells into many of them.
The round structure also matters. PSG Equity led, with Intel Capital participating. That is a later-stage and strategic investor mix, not only early deeptech venture. It suggests the company is being valued more like infrastructure software/hardware with commercial pull than like a pure science experiment.
Q-CTRL adds another signal. Its Series B expansion reached $113M, with $59M of new capital and a stated valuation increase. The company sits in performance management, error suppression, and quantum infrastructure software. That is not as flashy as building the final quantum computer, but it solves a problem every hardware team has today: noisy systems need to perform better before useful scale arrives.
This category also benefits from timing. Hardware teams are still fragmented across trapped ions, superconducting, silicon, photonics, and neutral atoms. That fragmentation actually helps control-stack companies because the market needs tools across all of those paths.
If you want more recent data on this point, please see our latest quantum computing market report.
Is money flowing into quantum error correction and fault-tolerance middleware right now?
Yes. Quantum error correction is not the biggest funding bucket, but it is becoming one of the most important conviction signals.
Riverlane raised $75M to build quantum error-correction technology, with a goal of reaching one million error-free quantum operations by 2026. The number matters because it shifts the conversation away from physical qubit counts. The market is starting to care about useful operations, not just impressive device sizes.
Alice & Bob gives another signal. Its €100M Series B in January 2025 was tied to fault-tolerant quantum computing and cat-qubit architecture. That is not generic hardware money but money going into an architecture designed to reduce the error-correction burden from the start.
Nord Quantique is a smaller but revealing signal. It received up to about $16M in Canadian non-dilutive funding and advanced in DARPA’s benchmarking process. The company’s story is about hardware-efficient error correction, including bosonic approaches that aim to reduce the overhead between physical and logical qubits. That is exactly the kind of technical wedge investors and governments are now trying to validate.
DARPA’s Quantum Benchmarking Initiative is the broader filter. Stage B moved 11 companies into technical validation for utility-scale architectures by 2033. That matters because government diligence is now forcing companies to prove cost, scale, and performance, rather than just publish roadmaps.
All things considered, error correction is where the market is getting more serious. The category is harder for generalist investors to understand, but if quantum computing becomes useful, this layer becomes unavoidable.
This chart, included in our quantum computing market deck, compares the main business model options for quantum computing hardware startups
Is money flowing into quantum software, algorithms, and application tooling right now?
Yes, but the money is more disciplined than in hardware.
Classiq is the strongest software signal. In May 2025, it raised $110M in what it described as the largest quantum software funding round. Later, the round expanded above $200M with AMD Ventures, Qualcomm Ventures, IonQ, SoftBank, and CDP Venture Capital joining. That is a very different signal from a normal software round. The investors are strategic, hardware-adjacent, and global.
The reported valuation was around $500M after the first tranche, and the company was already generating revenue. That matters because investors are actually funding a platform that can sell enterprise tooling before fault-tolerant hardware fully arrives.
Phasecraft is the more focused algorithm signal. Its $34M Series B in September 2025 was backed by Plural, Playground Global, and Novo Holdings’ quantum fund. Novo’s participation is useful to notice because it points toward life sciences and materials, not just generic quantum enthusiasm. Phasecraft also works across hardware providers like Google, IBM, Quantinuum, and QuEra, which gives it a hardware-agnostic angle.
The category is still limited by hardware readiness. A lot of quantum software value depends on better machines showing up. That is why the strongest companies are the ones selling abstraction, workflow, or algorithms that can work across multiple hardware paths.
Finally, software is getting money when it sounds less like “apps for machines that do not exist yet” and more like tooling for the whole quantum development cycle. That is a narrower market today, but it is much easier to defend.
Is money flowing into post-quantum cybersecurity right now?
Yes. Post-quantum cybersecurity has money behind it because the buyer problem exists today, even before useful quantum computers arrive.
This category is different from quantum computing hardware. It is not about building the machine but rather about protecting current data and infrastructure from future quantum attacks. That makes the market easier for enterprises and governments to budget for now: migrate cryptography, inventory exposure, and prepare systems before “harvest now, decrypt later” becomes a real problem.
PQShield is a good signal. It raised a $37M Series B in 2024 and has been cited with commercial traction across semiconductor, aerospace, and industrial customers. QuSecure also reached a $28M Series A in 2025, with Accenture Ventures involved. Those are not giant hardware-style rounds, but they show buyers and investors treating quantum-safe migration as a real security workflow.
SandboxAQ is the large adjacent signal. It is not a pure post-quantum cybersecurity company, but its multi-billion-dollar valuation and large funding base show that investors like quantum-adjacent categories that can sell before quantum computers are fully useful. That is the key difference: security can monetize the fear of quantum before quantum itself monetizes computation.
So we can conclude that post-quantum cybersecurity is getting money because it has the clearest near-term budget logic. It should not be mixed too casually with quantum hardware, but it is absolutely one of the places where quantum-related spending is already landing.
This chart, featured in our quantum computing market deck, illustrates how revenue is divided among customer segments in the quantum computing market
So, where is the money in quantum computing right now?
The money is currently moving toward the categories that make quantum feel scalable, financeable, or useful before the perfect machine exists.
The most important shift is that investors are no longer just paying for “more qubits” but for credible scale paths: semiconductor manufacturing, photonic networking, modular systems, control infrastructure, logical operations, and public-market platforms with enough capital to survive the long build.
| Rank | Category | Signals that prove it |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Full-stack quantum platforms | Quantinuum’s $600M private round at a $10B pre-money valuation, then $1.68B IPO around nine months later; IonQ’s $1.075B mostly stock Oxford Ionics acquisition; D-Wave’s 179% revenue growth and $884.5M liquidity. |
| 2 | Photonic quantum computing | PsiQuantum’s $1B round at a $7B valuation; Nvidia, BlackRock, Temasek, and Baillie Gifford in the round; Photonic’s $200M+ round at a $2B post-money valuation; Xanadu’s public-market path. |
| 3 | Silicon / semiconductor quantum computing | Quantum Motion’s $160M Series C; Quobly’s unusually large €115M Series A with STMicroelectronics and Bpifrance; Equal1’s $60M raise and Dell-linked rack-mounted system. |
| 4 | Distributed quantum computing and interconnects | Photonic’s $2B post-money valuation; Nu Quantum’s $60M oversubscribed Series A led by National Grid Partners; IonQ’s networking and secure-communication acquisition pattern. |
| 5 | Quantum control and hardware infrastructure | Quantum Machines’ $170M Series C and claimed customer base across more than half of quantum-computer developers; Q-CTRL’s $113M Series B expansion; strategic participation from Intel Capital. |
| 6 | Neutral-atom quantum computing | QuEra’s $230M Series B expansion with Nvidia; Atom Computing’s $100M planned U.S. funding signal; Pasqal’s 200-qubit Aramco deployment; DARPA Stage B validation for Atom and QuEra. |
| 7 | Trapped-ion quantum computing | Quantinuum’s capital-market progression; IonQ’s $1.075B Oxford Ionics acquisition; Quantum Art’s $100M round tied to an ambitious logical-qubit roadmap. |
| 8 | Superconducting quantum computing | OQC’s £260M Series C, Europe’s largest private quantum computing round; IBM and Google continuing to validate the architecture; Rigetti showing why investors are more selective with weaker public-market profiles. |
| 9 | Quantum error correction and middleware | Riverlane’s $75M QEC round and MegaQuOp target; Alice & Bob’s €100M Series B; Nord Quantique’s non-dilutive funding and DARPA validation; broader shift from physical qubits to logical operations. |
| 10 | Quantum software and algorithms | Classiq’s $110M round, later expanded above $200M with AMD, Qualcomm, IonQ, SoftBank, and CDP; Phasecraft’s $34M Series B with Novo Holdings; revenue and enterprise tooling signals matter more than pure algorithm hype. |
| 11 | Post-quantum cybersecurity | PQShield’s $37M Series B; QuSecure’s $28M Series A with Accenture Ventures; SandboxAQ’s large quantum-adjacent funding and valuation; near-term enterprise budget logic around quantum-safe migration. |
If you want more recent data on this point, please see our latest quantum computing market report.
This chart, included in our quantum computing market deck, shows how cloud quantum computing access technology has evolved over time
OUR METHODOLOGY
We treated the question less as a prediction exercise and more as an evidence-mapping problem. “Where is the money in quantum computing?” is still hard to answer clearly if we rely on intuition, isolated headlines, or broad views of the market, so we broke the space into distinct company categories and looked at the freshest signals inside each one.
For each category, we prioritized recent evidence that showed capital formation, strategic validation, public-market access, customer pull, government support, or industrial deployment. We then aggregated the strongest signals rather than letting one large financing round define the answer by itself.
That is why the analysis gives weight not only to money raised, but also to valuation step-ups, strategic investors, acquisitions, revenue growth, public-market activity, government programs, and real deployments.
We used the final ranking to compare the strength and density of those signals across categories. Categories ranked higher when several fresh signals pointed in the same direction: more capital, stronger investors, clearer scale paths, or more visible commercial and strategic momentum.
This structured aggregation is what lets the answer move beyond “quantum is hot” and toward a more defensible view of where money is actually concentrating now.
Key sources used for this analysis include: Honeywell on Quantinuum’s $600M raise at a $10B pre-money valuation, PsiQuantum on its $1B raise at a $7B valuation, Photonic on its $200M-plus round and $2B post-money valuation, OQC on its £260M Series C, IonQ on the Oxford Ionics acquisition, D-Wave on 2025 revenue growth and liquidity, Quantum Motion on its $160M Series C and silicon-transistor claims, TMCnet on Quobly’s €115M Series A, University College Dublin on Equal1’s $60M raise and rack-mounted quantum-classical system, QuEra on its $230M Series B expansion with NVentures, Aramco on Pasqal’s 200-qubit neutral-atom deployment, DARPA on the Quantum Benchmarking Initiative, Quantum Machines on its $170M Series C, Q-CTRL on its Series B expansion to $113M, Riverlane on its $75M quantum error-correction raise, Alice & Bob on its €100M Series B, Classiq on its $110M quantum software round, Phasecraft on its $34M Series B, PQShield on its $37M Series B, and NIST on post-quantum cryptography standards.
In our quantum computing market deck, we identify pain points entrepreneurs should prioritize
Related blog posts
- How strong is fundraising in the quantum computing market right now?
- The startups that have raised the most funding in quantum computing
- The most highly valued startups in quantum computing
- Who will win the quantum computing race?
- Quantinuum, IonQ, IBM, Google: who is ahead in quantum?
- Should you invest in quantum computing now or just wait?
