Skip to content

Benchmarks

Sources
18
Entries tracked
442
Last sync
35 min
All sources syncing normally
  • QED-C4 days ago
  • QAT · CVP1 hour ago
  • QAT · OE1 hour ago
  • QAT · VP1 hour ago
  • AQCE · QEC7 hours ago
  • AQCE · Errors7 hours ago
  • AQCE · Qubits7 hours ago
  • AQCE · T17 hours ago
  • IonQ fleet35 minutes ago
  • Wikipedia · Processors7 hours ago
  • Wikipedia · QV7 hours ago
  • Metriq · EPLG7 hours ago
  • Metriq · BSEQ7 hours ago
  • Metriq · CLOPS7 hours ago
  • Metriq · QML7 hours ago
  • Metriq · QAOA7 hours ago
  • Metriq · WIT7 hours ago
  • Metriq · Mirror7 hours ago

Quantum progress dashboard

How the field is moving — hardware ships, research volume, and vendor roadmap targets, in one view.

Qubit counts across modalities measure different things: a 1180-atom neutral-atom device and a 156-qubit superconducting chip are NOT directly comparable. Read the trends per lane, not as a cross-vendor ranking.

Physical qubits shipped, by modality

Each point is a vendor-announced processor with its physical-qubit count on the day it was published. Log-scale y so single-digit topological chips and thousand-atom neutral-atom devices both stay readable.

Vendor announcements (curated) plus Wikipedia's processor list (synced automatically)newest entry Sep 24, 2026last reviewed Oct 4, 2026

1101001k10k20162017201820192020202120222023202420252026IBM · IBM Q System One · 20 qubits · 2019-01-08Q System OneGoogle · Sycamore · 53 qubits · 2019-10-23SycamoreIonQ · IonQ 11-qubit · 11 qubits · 2019-12-1111-qubitHoneywell (Quantinuum) · H0 · 10 qubits · 2020-06-18H0IBM · IBM Hummingbird · 65 qubits · 2020-08-31HummingbirdQuantinuum · H1-1 · 12 qubits · 2021-07-14H1-1IBM · Eagle · 127 qubits · 2021-11-16EagleQuantinuum · H1-1 (upgrade) · 20 qubits · 2022-04-14H1-1 (upgrade)IonQ · Forte · 32 qubits · 2022-05-23ForteXanadu · Borealis · 216 qubits · 2022-06-01BorealisIBM · Osprey · 433 qubits · 2022-11-09OspreyGoogle · Sycamore (upgrade) · 70 qubits · 2023-02-14Sycamore (upgrade)Quantinuum · H2 · 32 qubits · 2023-05-09H2IonQ · Forte Enterprise · 36 qubits · 2023-05-23Forte EnterpriseRigetti · Aspen-M-3 · 84 qubits · 2023-08-15Aspen-M-3Atom Computing · 1180-qubit prototype · 1180 qubits · 2023-10-241180-qubit prototypeQuEra · Aquila · 256 qubits · 2023-11-13AquilaIBM · Condor · 1121 qubits · 2023-12-04CondorIBM · Heron R1 · 133 qubits · 2023-12-04Heron R1Quantinuum · H2-1 · 56 qubits · 2024-04-04H2-1QuEra (Harvard/MIT) · 48 logical qubits · 280 qubits · 2024-04-0548 logical qubitsXanadu · Aurora · 12 qubits · 2024-06-15AuroraPasqal · 1000-atom Orion · 1000 qubits · 2024-09-251000-atom OrionIBM · Heron R2 · 156 qubits · 2024-11-13Heron R2Atom Computing (Microsoft) · 24 logical qubits · 256 qubits · 2024-11-1924 logical qubitsGoogle · Willow · 105 qubits · 2024-12-09WillowMicrosoft · Majorana 1 · 8 qubits · 2025-02-19Majorana 1IonQ · Tempo · 64 qubits · 2025-06-01TempoRigetti · Ankaa-3 · 108 qubits · 2025-08-14Ankaa-3Quantinuum · Helios · 98 qubits · 2025-09-16HeliosIBM · Nighthawk · 120 qubits · 2025-11-12NighthawkRigetti · Cepheus-1-108Q · 108 qubits · 2026-04-07Cepheus-1-108QInfleqtion · Sqale · 80 qubits · 2026-09-24SqaleGoogle · Google 20-qubit processor · 20 qubits · 2017-01-0120-qubit processorAtom Computing · Phoenix · 100 qubits · 2021-08-10PhoenixGoogle · Bristlecone · 72 qubits · 2018-03-05BristleconeIBM · IBM Q 17 · 17 qubits · 2017-05-17Q 17Alpine Quantum Technologies · LYNX · 15 qubits · 2026-05-05LYNXIBM · IBM Q 5 Tenerife · 5 qubits · 2016-01-01Q 5 TenerifeIBM · IBM Q 53 · 53 qubits · 2019-10-01Q 53IBM · IBM Vigo · 5 qubits · 2019-07-03VigoIBM · IBM London · 5 qubits · 2019-09-13LondonIBM · IBM Burlington · 5 qubits · 2019-09-13BurlingtonIBM · IBM Armonk · 1 qubits · 2019-10-16ArmonkIBM · IBM Essex · 5 qubits · 2019-09-13EssexIntel · Tangle Lake · 49 qubits · 2018-01-09Tangle LakeIonQ · Aria · 25 qubits · 2022-01-01AriaIQM · IQM 5-qubit processor · 5 qubits · 2021-11-305-qubit processorM Squared Lasers · Maxwell · 200 qubits · 2022-11-01MaxwellIQM · IQM 20-qubit processor · 20 qubits · 2023-10-0920-qubit processorOxford Quantum Circuits · OQC Toshiko · 32 qubits · 2023-01-01OQC ToshikoQuandela · Ascella · 6 qubits · 2022-01-01AscellaQuantinuum · H1-2 · 12 qubits · 2022-01-01H1-2Quantware · Contralto · 25 qubits · 2022-03-07ContraltoRigetti · Acorn · 19 qubits · 2017-12-17AcornRigetti · Agave · 8 qubits · 2018-06-04AgaveRigetti · Aspen-4 · 13 qubits · 2019-03-10Aspen-4Rigetti · Aspen-7 · 28 qubits · 2019-11-15Aspen-7Rigetti · Aspen-8 · 31 qubits · 2020-05-05Aspen-8Rigetti · Aspen-10 · 32 qubits · 2021-11-04Aspen-10Rigetti · Aspen-M-1 · 80 qubits · 2022-02-15Aspen-M-1Rigetti · Aspen-11 · 40 qubits · 2021-12-15Aspen-11Rigetti · Aspen-M-2 · 80 qubits · 2022-08-01Aspen-M-2Rigetti · Ankaa-2 · 84 qubits · 2023-12-20Ankaa-2USTC · Jiuzhang · 76 qubits · 2020-01-01JiuzhangUSTC · Zuchongzhi 2.1 · 66 qubits · 2021-01-01Zuchongzhi 2.1USTC · Zuchongzhi · 62 qubits · 2020-01-01ZuchongzhiXanadu · X8 · 8 qubits · 2020-01-01X8USTC · Zuchongzhi 3.0 · 105 qubits · 2024-12-16Zuchongzhi 3.0Xanadu · X24 · 24 qubits · 2020-01-01X24Xanadu · X12 · 12 qubits · 2020-01-01X12IBM · IBM Q 16 Rüschlikon · 16 qubits · 2017-05-17Q 16 RüschlikonAlpine Quantum Technologies · PINE System · 24 qubits · 2021-06-07PINE SystemCAS · Xiaohong · 504 qubits · 2024-01-01XiaohongIBM · IBM Heron · 133 qubits · 2023-12-01HeronIBM · IBM Ourense · 5 qubits · 2019-07-03OurenseIBM · IBM Q 20 Tokyo · 20 qubits · 2017-11-10Q 20 TokyoIonQ · Harmony · 11 qubits · 2022-01-01HarmonyIntel · 17-Qubit Superconducting Test Chip · 17 qubits · 2017-10-1017-Qubit Superconducting Test ChipQuTech at TU Delft · Starmon-5 · 5 qubits · 2020-01-01Starmon-5Quantware · Tenor · 64 qubits · 2023-02-23TenorQuantware · Soprano · 5 qubits · 2021-07-01SopranoOxford Quantum Circuits · Lucy · 8 qubits · 2022-01-01LucyRIKEN · RIKEN · 53 qubits · 2023-03-27RIKENRigetti · Aspen-1 · 16 qubits · 2018-11-30Aspen-1Rigetti · Aspen-9 · 32 qubits · 2021-02-06Aspen-9Physical qubits (log)
Modality:superconductingtrapped ionneutral atomphotonictopological

86 milestones plotted

arXiv quant-ph submissions per month

A proxy for how much the research community is publishing on quantum topics. Refreshed every 12h from arxiv.org.

01,1472,294201820192020202120222023202420252026

Vendor roadmap targets

What vendors have publicly PROMISED, not what they've shipped. Each entry links to the vendor's own published roadmap so the promise is checkable.

Vendor announcements (curated) plus Wikipedia's processor list (synced automatically)newest entry Sep 24, 2026last reviewed Oct 4, 2026

  1. 2025
    • IonQTempo — AQ 64 (algorithmic qubits)source
  2. 2026
    • IBMKookaburra — modular 4,158-qubit systemsource
    • Atom ComputingLevel-4 fault-tolerant quantum computer (with Microsoft)source
  3. 2027
    • QuantinuumSol — universal fault-tolerant machinesource
    • PsiQuantum1-million-qubit photonic chip (Omega chipset)source
  4. 2029
    • IBMStarling — 200 logical qubits, 100M gatessource
    • QuantinuumApollo — hundreds of logical qubitssource
  5. 2030
    • GoogleLarge-scale fault-tolerant quantum computersource
    • IonQAQ 1,024 (algorithmic qubits), scale-out via networkingsource
  6. 2033
    • IBMBlue Jay — 2,000 logical qubits, 1B gatessource

Vendor snapshot — latest per vendor

One row per vendor, showing that vendor's most recent publicly-announced processor with its own self-reported capability numbers.

Vendor announcements (curated) plus Wikipedia's processor list (synced automatically)newest entry Sep 24, 2026last reviewed Oct 4, 2026

Self-reported by vendors — NOT directly comparable across rows. Qubits under different modalities count different things; Quantum Volume and Algorithmic Qubits are single-vendor system-level scores. Read as "vendor X currently reports Y", not as a ranking.

VendorProcessorAnnouncedModalityPhysical qubitsLogical qubitsAQQV2Q fidelitySource
InfleqtionSqaleSep 24, 2026Neutral-atom8030———vendor →
Alpine Quantum TechnologiesLYNXMay 5, 2026Trapped-ion15——32,768—vendor →
RigettiCepheus-1-108QApr 7, 2026Superconducting108———99.10%vendor →
IBMNighthawkNov 12, 2025Superconducting120————vendor →
QuantinuumHeliosSep 16, 2025Trapped-ion98——1,048,57699.92%vendor →
IonQTempoJun 1, 2025Trapped-ion64—64——vendor →
MicrosoftMajorana 1Feb 19, 2025Topological8————vendor →
USTCZuchongzhi 3.0Dec 16, 2024Superconducting105———99.62%vendor →
GoogleWillowDec 9, 2024Superconducting1051———vendor →
Atom Computing24 logical qubitsNov 19, 2024Neutral-atom25624———vendor →
Pasqal1000-atom OrionSep 25, 2024Neutral-atom1,000————vendor →
XanaduAuroraJun 15, 2024Photonic12————vendor →
QuEra48 logical qubitsApr 5, 2024Neutral-atom28048———vendor →
CAS
XiaohongJan 1, 2024Superconducting504————vendor →
IQMIQM 20-qubit processorOct 9, 2023Superconducting20——1698.25%vendor →
RIKENRIKENMar 27, 2023Superconducting53————vendor →
QuantwareTenorFeb 23, 2023Superconducting64————vendor →
Oxford Quantum CircuitsOQC ToshikoJan 1, 2023Superconducting32————vendor →
M Squared Lasers
MaxwellNov 1, 2022Neutral-atom200————vendor →
QuandelaAscellaJan 1, 2022Photonic6———93.80%vendor →
QuTech at TU Delft
Starmon-5Jan 1, 2020Superconducting5————vendor →
IntelTangle LakeJan 9, 2018Superconducting49————vendor →

Live vendor fleets

What IonQ and IBM publish about their own machines through their APIs: qubit count, availability and, where the API exposes it, the latest calibration. Grouped by vendor, never ranked across vendors.

Updates automaticallyIonQ Quantum Cloud API ↗ · LicenseRef-Vendor-APIIBM Quantum Platform API ↗ · LicenseRef-Vendor-API· synced 35 minutes ago· every 6 h, sooner when the source changes

IBM Quantum fleet — live systems: IBM_QUANTUM_API_KEY / IBM_QUANTUM_CRN unset

VendorSystemStatusQubits2Q fidelitySPAM fidelityMedian T1Reported
IonQForte 1 trapped-ionAvailable36———Oct 18, 2026
IonQForte Enterprise 3 trapped-ionUnavailable36———Oct 18, 2026
IonQForte Enterprise 1 trapped-ionAvailable36———Oct 18, 2026
IonQAria 2 trapped-ionRetired25———Oct 18, 2026
IonQAria 1 trapped-ionRetired25———Oct 18, 2026
IonQHarmony trapped-ionRetired11———Oct 18, 2026

Qubit counts and status come from the public endpoints. Fidelity and timing figures appear only when the worker has the vendor's API key; a dash means the key is not set or the vendor does not publish the figure.

System-level benchmarks on real hardware

metriq-gym runs published in the Unitary Foundation's metriq-data dataset: one table per benchmark, the newest run per device. Rows inside a table ran the same program and can be compared; tables cannot.

Updates automaticallyMetriq (Unitary Foundation) — metriq-gym runs ↗ · CC-BY-4.0· synced 7 hours ago· every 24 h, sooner when the source changes

BSEQ — largest connected qubit set (Metriq)

higher is better · 16 devices
DevicequbitsRun date
IBM Boston · IBM superconducting156Dec 9, 2025
IBM Fez · IBM superconducting155Oct 19, 2025
IBM Pittsburgh · IBM superconducting152Oct 19, 2025
IBM Marrakesh · IBM superconducting149Oct 19, 2025
IBM Kingston · IBM superconducting144Oct 19, 2025
IBM Miami · IBM superconducting120Apr 16, 2026
IBM Phoenix · IBM superconducting120Sep 11, 2026
IBM Torino · IBM superconducting113Oct 19, 2025
Quantinuum H2-2 · Quantinuum trapped-ion56Dec 18, 2025
IQM Emerald · IQM superconducting54Oct 19, 2025
IQM Garnet · IQM superconducting20Mar 2, 2026
OriginQ Wukong 72 · OriginQ superconducting6Nov 10, 2025

CLOPS — circuit layer operations per second (Metriq)

higher is better · 8 devices
DeviceclopsRun date
IBM Phoenix · IBM superconducting2,551,868Sep 11, 2026
IBM Fez · IBM superconducting368,905Feb 17, 2026
IBM Kingston · IBM superconducting362,372Feb 17, 2026
IBM Boston · IBM superconducting360,574Feb 9, 2026
IBM Pittsburgh · IBM superconducting358,613Feb 17, 2026
IBM Marrakesh · IBM superconducting353,642Feb 17, 2026
IBM Torino · IBM superconducting345,670Feb 17, 2026
IBM Miami · IBM superconducting24,573Aug 20, 2026

EPLG — error per layered gate (Metriq)

lower is better · 11 devices
DeviceeplgRun date
Quantinuum H2-2 · Quantinuum trapped-ion1.74e-3Jan 23, 2026
IBM Kingston · IBM superconducting5.49e-3Aug 20, 2026
IBM Boston · IBM superconducting7.36e-3Feb 18, 2026
IQM Garnet · IQM superconducting9.18e-3Jan 16, 2026
IBM Pittsburgh · IBM superconducting0.0203Feb 19, 2026
IBM Phoenix · IBM superconducting0.026Sep 11, 2026
IBM Miami · IBM superconducting0.0407Aug 14, 2026
IBM Fez · IBM superconducting0.0436Aug 20, 2026
IBM Torino · IBM superconducting0.0688Feb 19, 2026
Rigetti Cepheus-1 (108q) · Rigetti superconducting0.095Jul 24, 2026
IBM Marrakesh · IBM superconducting0.1128Aug 14, 2026

Linear Ramp QAOA at 20 qubits (Metriq)

higher is better · 15 devices
Deviceapprox-ratioRun date
Quantinuum H2-2 · Quantinuum trapped-ion0.7404Dec 12, 2025
IBM Boston · IBM superconducting0.6641Nov 26, 2025
IBM Phoenix · IBM superconducting0.625Sep 11, 2026
IBM Pittsburgh · IBM superconducting0.6222Feb 17, 2026
IBM Miami · IBM superconducting0.6058Apr 16, 2026
IBM Marrakesh · IBM superconducting0.574Feb 17, 2026
IBM Kingston · IBM superconducting0.5721Feb 17, 2026
IBM Torino · IBM superconducting0.5175Feb 10, 2026
IQM Emerald · IQM superconducting0.5076Nov 19, 2025
IBM Fez · IBM superconducting0.4897Feb 16, 2026
IonQ Forte 1 · IonQ trapped-ion0.437Jul 10, 2026
IQM Garnet · IQM superconducting0.1432Jan 9, 2026

Mirror circuits polarization, 16 qubits × 32 layers (Metriq)

higher is better · 14 devices
DevicepolarizationRun date
Quantinuum H2-2 · Quantinuum trapped-ion0.6898Dec 9, 2025
IBM Boston · IBM superconducting0.4952Dec 16, 2025
IBM Marrakesh · IBM superconducting0.4846Dec 16, 2025
IBM Pittsburgh · IBM superconducting0.4613Dec 16, 2025
IBM Phoenix · IBM superconducting0.4056Sep 11, 2026
IBM Kingston · IBM superconducting0.3871Dec 16, 2025
IBM Torino · IBM superconducting0.2757Dec 16, 2025
IBM Fez · IBM superconducting0.2624Dec 16, 2025
IBM Miami · IBM superconducting0.2082Aug 14, 2026
IQM Garnet · IQM superconducting3.85e-4Aug 7, 2026
OriginQ Wukong 72 · OriginQ superconducting0.00e+0Feb 24, 2026
IQM Emerald · IQM superconducting0.00e+0Aug 7, 2026

QML Kernel accuracy at 20 qubits (Metriq)

higher is better · 15 devices
DeviceaccuracyRun date
Quantinuum H2-2 · Quantinuum trapped-ion0.913Dec 8, 2025
IBM Boston · IBM superconducting0.742Dec 8, 2025
IBM Kingston · IBM superconducting0.6Nov 11, 2025
IBM Phoenix · IBM superconducting0.584Sep 11, 2026
IBM Torino · IBM superconducting0.488Nov 11, 2025
IBM Miami · IBM superconducting0.486Aug 13, 2026
IBM Marrakesh · IBM superconducting0.443Nov 11, 2025
IBM Pittsburgh · IBM superconducting0.435Nov 11, 2025
IBM Fez · IBM superconducting0.372Nov 11, 2025
IBM Brisbane · IBM superconducting0.285Oct 20, 2025
OriginQ Wukong 72 · OriginQ superconducting0.063Feb 24, 2026
IQM Emerald · IQM superconducting1.00e-3Jul 24, 2026

WIT witness expectation at 7 qubits (Metriq)

higher is better · 15 devices
DeviceexpectationRun date
Quantinuum H2-2 · Quantinuum trapped-ion0.9808Dec 5, 2025
IBM Phoenix · IBM superconducting0.9169Sep 11, 2026
IBM Boston · IBM superconducting0.8972Dec 16, 2025
IBM Pittsburgh · IBM superconducting0.8882Feb 10, 2026
IBM Miami · IBM superconducting0.8835Apr 16, 2026
IBM Kingston · IBM superconducting0.8655Feb 20, 2026
IBM Torino · IBM superconducting0.7727Oct 21, 2025
IQM Garnet · IQM superconducting0.7595Sep 9, 2026
IBM Marrakesh · IBM superconducting0.7581Feb 10, 2026
IBM Fez · IBM superconducting0.6833Oct 22, 2025
IQM Emerald · IQM superconducting0.6646Oct 22, 2025
Rigetti Cepheus-1 (108q) · Rigetti superconducting0.5363Jul 15, 2026

Quantum volume records

Reported quantum-volume records over time, from Wikipedia's article on the metric. A record list, not a vendor ranking: QV is one vendor-defined system metric among several.

Updates automaticallyWikipedia ↗ · CC-BY-SA-4.0· synced 7 hours ago· every 24 h, sooner when the source changes

2^52^102^152^202^252020202120222023202420252026IBM Raleigh · 2^5Honeywell Honeywell 2020, June · 2^6IBM Falcon r4 "Montreal" · 2^6Honeywell System Model H1 · 2^7IBM Falcon r4 "Montreal" · 2^7Honeywell System Model H1 · 2^9Honeywell Honeywell System H1 · 2^10Quantinuum Quantinuum System Model H1-2 · 2^11Quantinuum Quantinuum System Model H1-2 · 2^12IBM Falcon r10 "Prague" · 2^8IBM Falcon r10 "Prague" · 2^9Quantinuum Quantinuum System Model H1-1 · 2^13Quantinuum Quantinuum System Model H1-1 · 2^15Alpine Quantum Technologies Compact Ion-Trap Quantum Computing Demonstrator · 2^7Quantinuum Quantinuum System Model H2 · 2^16Quantinuum Quantinuum System Model H1-1 · 2^19IQM IQM 20-qubit system · 2^5Quantinuum Quantinuum System Model H1-1 · 2^20Quantinuum Quantinuum System Model H2-1 · 2^21Quantinuum Quantinuum System Model H2-1 · 2^23IBM Heron r3 "Pittsburgh" · 2^11IBM Heron r3 "Pittsburgh" · 2^10Quantinuum Quantinuum System Model H2-2 · 2^25Alpine Quantum Technologies LYNX quantum computer Series · 2^15
DateQuantum volumeSystem
May 1, 202632,768Alpine Quantum Technologies LYNX quantum computer Series
Sep 1, 202533,554,432Quantinuum Quantinuum System Model H2-2
Aug 1, 20252,048IBM Heron r3 "Pittsburgh"
Aug 1, 20251,024IBM Heron r3 "Pittsburgh"
May 1, 20258,388,608Quantinuum Quantinuum System Model H2-1
Aug 1, 20242,097,152Quantinuum Quantinuum System Model H2-1
Apr 1, 20241,048,576Quantinuum Quantinuum System Model H1-1
Feb 1, 202432IQM IQM 20-qubit system
Jun 1, 2023524,288Quantinuum Quantinuum System Model H1-1
May 1, 202365,536Quantinuum Quantinuum System Model H2
Feb 1, 202332,768Quantinuum Quantinuum System Model H1-1
Feb 1, 2023128Alpine Quantum Technologies Compact Ion-Trap Quantum Computing Demonstrator

Records from the literature

A maintained database of published experiments: error-correction demonstrations, entangled-state error, qubit-count records and coherence times. Every row links to its paper.

Updates automaticallyawesome-quantum-computing-experiments (François-Marie Le Régent) ↗ · MIT· synced 7 hours ago· every 24 h, sooner when the source changes

Error-correction experiments

Code distance d of demonstrated QEC codes [[n,k,d]] · 61 rows

Highest

Newest

Entangled-state error

Lowest reported error of a prepared entangled state · 34 rows

Lowest

Newest

Entangled-qubit records

Largest number of qubits entangled in one experiment · 27 rows

Highest

Newest

Coherence times

T1 of a physical qubit, by platform · 36 rows

Highest

Newest

Quantum · investment tracker

Funding ledger

Funding events extracted from the quantum-tagged news corpus by an LLM pass. Each row links back to the source article.

82 events — extraction started Oct 4, 2026. Rows are LLM-extracted from the quantum-tagged news corpus and link to their article. The same round reported by several outlets is shown once, with the number of reports beside it. Totals describe what the corpus caught, not the market. Rows marked low confidence are extractions worth checking.

Rounds per quarter

The last eight quarters. A young pipeline shows as a spike in its first quarter, not as a trend.

AnnouncedCompanyAmountRunningSource
Oct 15, 2026Unitary Quantum$29M$29MInside Quantum Technology ↗
Oct 15, 2026Quantinuum$100M$129MInside Quantum Technology ↗
Oct 15, 2026Rigetti Computing$100M$229MInside Quantum Technology ↗
Oct 15, 2026IBM$1B$1.2BInside Quantum Technology ↗
Oct 15, 2026PsiQuantum$1B$2.2BInside Quantum Technology ↗
Oct 15, 2026EMode Photonix$1M$2.2BThe Quantum Insider ↗
Oct 15, 2026Taiyi Quantumseed funding$2.2BInside Quantum Technology ↗
Oct 15, 2026D-Wave$100M$2.3BInside Quantum Technology ↗
Oct 14, 2026QFX (Quantum Fabrix Ltd)£6.8M$2.3BThe Quantum Insider ↗
Oct 14, 2026Qilimanjaro Quantum Tech3 reports$21.9M$2.4BQuantum Computing Report ↗
Oct 14, 2026Quantum Fabrix Ltd£6.8M$2.4BQuantum Zeitgeist ↗
Oct 14, 2026IonQ2 reports$2B$4.4BQuantum Computing Report ↗
Oct 1, 2026WISeSat.Space Holdings Corp4 reports$10M$4.4BQuantum Computing Report ↗
Oct 13, 2026Infleqtion$12M$4.4BThe Quantum Insider ↗
Oct 13, 2026QLM Technology Ltd£50M$4.4BQuantum Zeitgeist ↗
Oct 13, 2026Aegiq£20M$4.4BQuantum Zeitgeist ↗
Oct 13, 2026MoniRail£50M$4.4BQuantum Zeitgeist ↗
Oct 13, 2026ColdQuanta UK£50M$4.4BQuantum Zeitgeist ↗
Oct 13, 2026Siloton£50M$4.4BQuantum Zeitgeist ↗
Oct 13, 2026UK£50M$4.4BQuantum Zeitgeist ↗
Oct 10, 2026QuantWare$178M$4.6BQuantum Zeitgeist ↗
Oct 10, 2026SandboxAQ$500M$5.1BQuantum Zeitgeist ↗
Oct 9, 2026FeBI Technologies2 reports$1.5M$5.1BQubits.cz ↗
Oct 8, 2026PsiQuantum2 reports$150M$5.2BQuantum Computing Report ↗
Oct 8, 2026Oratomic2 reports$775M$6BThe Quantum Insider ↗
Oct 8, 2026Diraq3 reports$300M$6.3BQuantum Zeitgeist ↗
Oct 8, 2026Universal Quantum4 reports$100M$6.4BThe Quantum Insider ↗
Oct 7, 2026KQC Quantum$80M$6.5BQuantum Computing Report ↗
Oct 7, 2026KQC Quantum$215M$6.7BThe Quantum Insider ↗
Oct 7, 2026Korea Quantum Computing, Inc.$80M$6.8BQuantum Zeitgeist ↗
Oct 7, 2026Quanfluence$10M$6.8BThe Quantum Insider ↗
Oct 7, 2026QuantumCT2 reports$50.5M$6.8BQuantum Computing Report ↗
Oct 6, 2026Pasqal€50M$6.8BThe Quantum Insider ↗
Oct 5, 2026planqc$138.8M$7BQuantum Computing Report ↗
Oct 5, 2026AQT Germany GmbH$138.8M$7.1BQuantum Computing Report ↗
Oct 3, 2026Silicon Quantum Computing$2.5M$7.1BQuantum Computing Report ↗
Oct 1, 2026Quantum Internet Alliance€47.5M$7.1BQuantum Zeitgeist ↗
Oct 1, 2026WISeKeylow confidence2 reports$200M$7.3BQuantum Zeitgeist ↗
Sep 30, 2026Photonic Inc.C$180M$7.3BQuantum Computing Report ↗
Sep 29, 2026EigenQ$45M$7.3BThe Quantum Insider ↗
Sep 28, 2026QSENSATO€1M$7.3BQuantum Zeitgeist ↗
Sep 25, 2026Mesa Quantum$11.8M$7.4BQuantum Computing Report ↗
Sep 25, 2026Qambria AG$2.4M$7.4BQuantum Computing Report ↗
Sep 25, 2026Qingxing Heterogeneous Computing¥100M$7.4BThe Quantum Insider ↗
Sep 25, 2026Azulene Labs$3.4M$7.4BQuantum Zeitgeist ↗
Sep 24, 2026D-Wave Quantum2 reports$100M$7.5Bforeignpolicyjournal.com ↗
Sep 24, 2026QUDORA Technologies$138.8M$7.6BQuantum Computing Report ↗
Sep 24, 2026Ayar Labs$500M$8.1BQuantum Zeitgeist ↗
Sep 24, 2026Rigetti Computing$5M$8.1Bforeignpolicyjournal.com ↗
Sep 23, 2026George Mason University$2.4M$8.1BThe Quantum Insider ↗
Sep 23, 2026QUDORA Technologies€122M$8.1BQuantum Zeitgeist ↗
Sep 16, 2026Quobly3 reports$133.5M$8.3BQuantum Computing Report ↗
Sep 16, 2026Anderon LLC2 reports$1B$9.3BQuantum Computing Report ↗
Sep 21, 2026Kairos Power$70M$9.3BTechCrunch ↗
Sep 21, 2026Fortaegis$50M$9.4BQuantum Zeitgeist ↗
Sep 21, 2026GlobalFoundries$375M$9.7BQuantum Zeitgeist ↗
Sep 19, 2026OptQC Corp.$47M$9.8BQuantum Computing Report ↗
Sep 19, 2026Fortaegis Technologies$50M$9.8BQuantum Computing Report ↗
Sep 18, 2026Infleqtion3 reports$3M$9.8BQuantum Zeitgeist ↗
Sep 17, 2026LastwallC$16M$9.9BQuantum Computing Report ↗
Sep 15, 2026Falqon Systems€2.5M$9.9BQuantum Zeitgeist ↗
Sep 14, 2026Rigetti Computing$100M$10BQuantum Computing Report ↗
Sep 11, 2026Qubic$3.5M$10BQuantum Zeitgeist ↗
Sep 9, 2026QNu Labs3 reports$21M$10BThe Quantum Insider ↗
Sep 10, 2026Quantinuum$100M$10.1Bfool.com ↗
Sep 10, 2026NVision Quantum Technologies€293.5K$10.1BQuantum Computing Report ↗
Sep 9, 2026Keyfactor$1B$11.1BQuantum Zeitgeist ↗
Aug 27, 2026Pasqal Holding SA$355.8M$11.4BQuantum Computing Report ↗
Aug 20, 2026QTREX Quantum Ltd.$10M$11.4BThe Quantum Insider ↗
Jul 1, 2026Keyfactor$1B$12.4BQuantum Computing Report ↗
Jul 1, 2026Quantum Secure Encryption Corp.C$3M$12.4BQuantum Zeitgeist ↗
Jun 30, 2026D-Wave Quantum Inc.$1.5M$12.5BQuantum Zeitgeist ↗
Jun 19, 2026NVision Quantum Technologies€293.5K$12.5BThe Quantum Insider ↗
Jun 1, 2026Quobly2 reports€115M$12.6BQuantum Computing Report ↗
May 1, 2026Anderon$1B$13.6BThe Quantum Insider ↗
Feb 13, 2026Infleqtion$528.2M$14.1BQuantum Zeitgeist ↗
Feb 1, 2026Inertia$450M$14.6BTechCrunch ↗
Jan 7, 2026Quantum Circuits Inc$550M$15.1BQuantum Zeitgeist ↗
Jan 1, 2026Project Eleven$20M$15.1BQuantum Computing Report ↗
Dec 1, 2025CERN$1B$16.1BThe Quantum Insider ↗
Sep 30, 2025Atomionics$12.7M$16.1BThe Quantum Insider ↗
Jan 1, 2025Quantum Machines$170M$16.3BQuantum Zeitgeist ↗

82 events · running total $16.3B · newest first · the running column adds USD figures only; other currencies are shown as published, converted in the tooltip

Quantum applications — algorithm benchmarks

The QED-C reference circuits — algorithm-oriented benchmarks any backend can run on the same program. QED-C ships the harness (Apache-2.0); the hardware runs come from the Unitary Foundation's metriq-data dataset (CC BY 4.0), collected with metriq-gym. Ranked only where devices ran the same circuit at the same widths.

QED-C circuits on real hardware — QFT fidelity by device

One row per device: its most recent Quantum Fourier Transform run from the QED-C suite, swept over 4, 8 and 12 qubits (3 circuits per width, 1000 shots, no error mitigation), as published in metriq-data. Fidelity 0–1, mean across the sweep. Higher is better.

Higher is better · QFT fidelity
RankDeviceOrgModalityFidelityRun
1Quantinuum H2-2QuantinuumTrapped-ion0.967±0.006Dec 8, 2025
2IBM BostonIBMSuperconducting0.440±0.009†Feb 9, 2026
3IBM PittsburghIBMSuperconducting0.400±0.014†Feb 9, 2026
4IBM TorinoIBMSuperconducting0.342±0.006†Feb 9, 2026
5IBM KingstonIBMSuperconducting0.334±0.009†Feb 9, 2026
6IBM MarrakeshIBMSuperconducting0.285±0.021†Feb 9, 2026
7IBM FezIBMSuperconducting0.233±0.027†Feb 9, 2026
8IQM EmeraldIQMSuperconducting0.129±0.016Nov 19, 2025
9OriginQ Wukong 102OriginQSuperconducting0.002±0.002Jan 7, 2026
10OriginQ Wukong 72OriginQSuperconducting0.000±0.000Feb 24, 2026

† Mean of three single-width runs (4, 8, 12 qubits) uploaded on the same day instead of one sweep run; same formula metriq-gym applies to a sweep.

Only runs that match this one protocol are ranked. Runs at other widths or with error mitigation are left out rather than compared. Other QED-C circuits (Bernstein–Vazirani, Hidden Shift, Phase Estimation) have no published hardware runs yet.

Quantum research — advantage submissions

Ingested from the Quantum Advantage Tracker (Apache-2.0) — a community catalogue of quantum-advantage claims across three pathways. Cross-instance comparisons are NOT meaningful and we honour that: submissions are grouped by instance, no interleaved global ranking. Each row links back to its GitHub issue for full provenance (runtime, compute resources, methods).

Quantum vs classical runtime

Each point is one CVP or VP submission that reports both wall-clock runtimes. Log-log axes; the dashed line is the y=x tie. Points below the line resolved the instance faster with quantum + classical compute than a purely classical baseline.

0.11s10s2m17m3h1d12d0.11s10s2m17m3h1d12dy = x (tie)Quantum runtimeClassical runtimeIBM · CVP quantum: 633s classical: 197sSingapore Management University · CVP quantum: 229.924343s classical: 0.004782625sSingapore Management University · CVP quantum: 237.588s classical: 0.010313208sIBM, ORNL, University of Maryland · VP quantum: 3600s classical: 345600sIBM, RIKEN · VP quantum: 36000s classical: 36000sIBM, RIKEN, University of Chicago · VP quantum: 68400s classical: 593sQunova Computing, RIKEN · VP quantum: 394s classical: 41652sQunova Computing, RIKEN · VP quantum: 75s classical: 23179s
CVPVPy = x (tie)

Top contributing institutions

Submissions per institution, stacked by pathway. Multi-institution credits count each institution once. Top 10 by total.

IBMIBMIBM — CVP 7IBM — OE 12IBM — VP 1029AlgorithmiqAlgorithmiqAlgorithmiq — OE 1414Flatiron InstituteFlatiron InstituteFlatiron Institute — OE 1414RIKENRIKENRIKEN — VP 1313University of ChicagoUniversity of ChicagoUniversity of Chicago — CVP 1University of Chicago — OE 3University of Chicago — VP 610BlueQubitBlueQubitBlueQubit — CVP 4BlueQubit — OE 26Qunova ComputingQunova ComputingQunova Computing — VP 44EPFLEPFLEPFL — OE 33University of Wisconsin -…University of Wisconsin - MadisonUniversity of Wisconsin - Madison — VP 33University of TorontoUniversity of TorontoUniversity of Toronto — CVP 22
CVPOEVPsubmissions

Cumulative submissions over time

Running total of accepted submissions per pathway. The Quantum Advantage Tracker started accepting submissions in 2025.

0481216Nov 25Sep 26CVP (14)OE (19)VP (17)submissions over time

Classically-Verifiable Problems (CVP)

Problems whose answers can be checked classically. Value = percent of the target checked correctly.

Higher is better · Value %
7 instances · 14 submissions
doped_random_graph_sampling_nq70_depth70_checks271 submission(s)
SubmissionInstitutionsValue %Source
ibm_boston_dcs_nq70_depth70_checks27IBM, UChicago0.3%GitHub issue →
peaked_circuit_heavy_hex_49x40203 submission(s)
SubmissionInstitutionsValue %Source
TNO + Iterative Cancellation for peaked_circuit_heavy_hex_49x4020IBM100.0%GitHub issue →
Quantum Runtime for peaked_circuit_heavy_hex_49x4020IBM100.0%GitHub issue →
TNS+BP for peaked_circuit_heavy_hex_49x4020BlueQubit100.0%GitHub issue →
peaked_circuit_heavy_hex_49x50723 submission(s)
SubmissionInstitutionsValue %Source
tno_cancellation_49x5072IBM100.0%GitHub issue →
TNS + BP classical simulation for peaked_heavyhex_49_5072 circuitBlueQubit100.0%GitHub issue →
Quantum runtime for peaked circuit 49q x 5072 CZ's on heavy-hexIBM100.0%GitHub issue →
peaked_circuit_P11_Hqap_98x19991 submission(s)
SubmissionInstitutionsValue %Source
Quantinuum Helios-1 recovery for peaked_circuit_P11_Hqap_98x1999Singapore Management University100.0%GitHub issue →
peaked_circuit_P12_Hqap_98x24571 submission(s)
SubmissionInstitutionsValue %Source
Quantinuum Helios-1 recovery for peaked_circuit_P12_Hqap_98x2457Singapore Management University100.0%GitHub issue →
peaked_circuit_P9_Hqap_56x19174 submission(s)
SubmissionInstitutionsValue %Source
mpo_unswapping_cpu_laptop_56_1917Moderna100.0%GitHub issue →
mpo_unswapping_56_1917IBM100.0%GitHub issue →
Classical Solution for peaked_circuit_p9_hqap_56x1917BlueQubit, University of Toronto, Vector Institute100.0%GitHub issue →
Quantum Solution for peaked_circuit_p9_hqap_56x1917BlueQubit, University of Toronto, Vector Institute100.0%GitHub issue →
random_graph_sampling_nq70_depth70_checks27_basis_fstate1 submission(s)
SubmissionInstitutionsValue %Source
ibm_boston_rgs_nq70_depth70_checks27_basis_fstateIBM, University of Chicago0.4%GitHub issue →

Observable Estimations (OE)

Estimation of an observable on a canonical circuit. Value = observable estimate; the instance's reference value lives on the source page.

Higher is better · Observable value
5 instances · 19 submissions
floquet_mixed_field_ising_zzd3_51qx16c2 submission(s)
SubmissionInstitutionsObservable valueSource
QESEM (unbiased), ibm_boston, ZZd3, 51qx16cQedma, IBM, Riken, BlueQubit0.2111GitHub issue →
SPP, ORQA (eps0=5e-8, W=16), ZZd3, 51qx16cQedma, IBM, Riken, BlueQubit0.1834GitHub issue →
operator_loschmidt_echo_49x12966 submission(s)
SubmissionInstitutionsObservable valueSource
49x1296, BP-TN BD=512, rescaledAlgorithmiq, Flatiron Institute0.9426GitHub issue →
49x1296, BP-TN BD=512, no rescalingAlgorithmiq, Flatiron Institute0.8816GitHub issue →
49x1296, ibm_bostonIBM, Algorithmiq, Flatiron Institute0.6620GitHub issue →
49x1296, ibm_boston (layout 2)IBM, Algorithmiq, Flatiron Institute0.6570GitHub issue →
49x1296, ibm_pittsburghIBM, Algorithmiq, Flatiron Institute0.6490GitHub issue →
Single_path_MC_49x1296University of Chicago, IBM, Algorithmiq, EPFL, Flatiron Institute0.6190GitHub issue →
operator_loschmidt_echo_49x6484 submission(s)
SubmissionInstitutionsObservable valueSource
49x648, ibm_bostonIBM, Algorithmiq, Flatiron Institute0.8240GitHub issue →
49x648, BP-TN BD=512, no rescalingAlgorithmiq, Flatiron Institute0.8217GitHub issue →
49x648, BP-TN BD=192, no rescalingAlgorithmiq, Flatiron Institute0.8203GitHub issue →
Single_path_MC_49x648University of Chicago, IBM, Algorithmiq, EPFL, Flatiron Institute0.8080GitHub issue →
operator_loschmidt_echo_70x18724 submission(s)
SubmissionInstitutionsObservable valueSource
70x1872, BP-TN BD=512, rescaledAlgorithmiq, Flatiron Institute0.9525GitHub issue →
70x1872, BP-TN BD=512, no rescalingAlgorithmiq, Flatiron Institute0.8738GitHub issue →
70x1872, ibm_bostonIBM, Algorithmiq, Flatiron Institute0.6730GitHub issue →
Single_path_MC_70x1872University of Chicago, IBM, Algorithmiq, EPFL, Flatiron Institute0.6140GitHub issue →
su2_hadron_dynamics_lsh_x_100_meson3 submission(s)
SubmissionInstitutionsObservable valueSource
Simulating SU(2) Hadron dynamics on a 60 site lattice using 120 qubitsBirla Institute of Technology and Science - Pilani, IBM60.0054GitHub issue →
su2_hadron_MPSCaltech59.9985GitHub issue →
Simulating SU(2) Hadron dynamics on a 60 site lattice using 120 qubitsBirla Institute of Technology and Science - Pilani, IBM59.9940GitHub issue →

Variational Problems (VP)

Variational energy minimisation over a specified Hamiltonian. Value = energy (lower is better).

Lower is better · Energy
5 instances · 17 submissions
2fe_2s_30e_20o2 submission(s)
SubmissionInstitutionsEnergySource
[2Fe-2S] (30e, 20o) HCIQunova Computing, RIKEN-116.6054GitHub issue →
[2Fe-2S] (30e, 20o) HI-VQEQunova Computing, RIKEN-116.6047GitHub issue →
4fe_4s_54e_36o6 submission(s)
SubmissionInstitutionsEnergySource
TrimCI_202511_6e7University of Wisconsin - Madison-327.1750GitHub issue →
TrimCI_202511_1e4University of Wisconsin - Madison-326.9130GitHub issue →
SQD [4Fe-4S] (54e, 36o)IBM, RIKEN-326.9130GitHub issue →
TrimCI_202511_1e3University of Wisconsin - Madison-326.8100GitHub issue →
[4Fe-4S] (54e, 36o) CISDIBM, RIKEN-326.7421GitHub issue →
[4Fe-4S] (54e, 36o) RHFIBM, RIKEN-326.5474GitHub issue →
anderson_impurity_model_4i_28b_32e1 submission(s)
SubmissionInstitutionsEnergySource
SKQDIBM, ORNL, University of Maryland-62.2567GitHub issue →
guided_sparse_ground_state_problem_49Q_v16 submission(s)
SubmissionInstitutionsEnergySource
TAM_for_guided_sparse_ground_state_problem_49Q_v1IBM, RIKEN, University of Chicago-85.5866GitHub issue →
SKQD_for_guided_sparse_ground_state_problem_49Q_v1IBM, RIKEN, University of Chicago-85.5866GitHub issue →
DMRG solution of guided_sparse_ground_state_problem_49Q_v1IBM, RIKEN, University of Chicago-85.5866GitHub issue →
HCI solution of guided_sparse_ground_state_problem_49Q_v1IBM, RIKEN, University of Chicago-85.5766GitHub issue →
CIPSI solution of guided_sparse_ground_state_problem_49Q_v1IBM, RIKEN, University of Chicago-85.5766GitHub issue →
ASCI solution of guided_sparse_ground_state_problem_49Q_v1IBM, RIKEN, University of Chicago-85.5566GitHub issue →
n2_3-00_14e_28o2 submission(s)
SubmissionInstitutionsEnergySource
[N_2] (14e, 28o) 3.0A HCIQunova Computing, RIKEN-108.9615GitHub issue →
[N_2] (14e, 28o) 3.0A HI-VQEQunova Computing, RIKEN-108.9612GitHub issue →
About the metrics used above

Quantum hardware — capability metrics

Logical qubits

What it measures
Number of error-corrected qubits a system has demonstrated, after decoding physical qubits into fault-tolerant logical ones.
Why it matters
The post-error-correction scale metric. Physical qubit counts are misleading on their own; logical qubits are what algorithms actually run on.

Quantum Volume (QV)

What it measures
IBM's system-level capability metric — a single number combining qubit count, connectivity, gate fidelity, and coherence.
Why it matters
The longest-running cross-vendor capability headline. Higher QV means the machine can run wider, deeper circuits before noise dominates.

CLOPS (Circuit Layer Operations Per Second)

What it measures
IBM's speed benchmark — sustained circuit layers per second while running parameterised model circuits at a fixed QV.
Why it matters
Throughput axis paired with QV. Two machines at the same QV can differ 10× in CLOPS — matters for anything variational.

Two-qubit gate fidelity

What it measures
Success rate of a single two-qubit entangling gate, typically reported as a percentage or per-gate error rate.
Why it matters
The fidelity axis every modality argues over. Sets the threshold for whether error correction can even reach break-even.

Quantum applications — algorithm benchmarks

QED-C application-oriented suite

What it measures
A collection of algorithm-primitive reference circuits (Hidden Shift, Bernstein–Vazirani, QFT, phase estimation, amplitude estimation) run across qubit widths to produce a volumetric positioning plot per backend.
Why it matters
The most widely-cited cross-vendor framework for comparing quantum hardware on real algorithm shapes rather than synthetic capability numbers.

Bernstein–Vazirani

What it measures
Recovery of a hidden bit-string with a single quantum query — scaled to arbitrary qubit widths as a discrimination test.
Why it matters
One of the cleanest 'is my hardware running the intended circuit, or just noise?' checks — the ideal success rate is 100%.

Quantum Fourier transform

What it measures
Fidelity of running a QFT circuit at a given width — the subroutine underlying Shor's algorithm and phase estimation.
Why it matters
A stress test for gate-depth budgets and connectivity; degrades sharply once decoherence exceeds circuit depth.

Quantum phase estimation

What it measures
Accuracy of estimating an operator's eigenphase — the core primitive for eigenvalue-finding applications.
Why it matters
The primitive behind chemistry, materials, and cryptanalysis workloads — a good proxy for real utility beyond toy circuits.

Amplitude estimation

What it measures
Accuracy of estimating a marked-state amplitude — the quadratic speed-up primitive for Monte Carlo-style workloads.
Why it matters
Underlies the finance / pricing / risk applications quantum vendors most often name in commercial pitches.

Quantum reference sources

Editorial rankings and benchmark catalogues we link to but do not republish. No scores, no ranks — just where to go for each vendor's numbers.

Quantum Zeitgeist — Logical Qubit Leaderboard

Quantum hardware
What it measures
Verified logical-qubit counts across quantum hardware vendors, updated as new milestones are announced.
When to consult it
Tracking who is furthest along on error-corrected logical qubits — the emerging cross-vendor capability metric.

Quantum Zeitgeist — Top Hardware by Modality

Quantum hardware
What it measures
Vendor rankings organised by hardware modality (superconducting, trapped-ion, neutral-atom, photonic).
When to consult it
Seeing which vendors lead within each qubit technology, not just overall.

EntangledFuture — Largest Quantum Computers

Quantum hardware
What it measures
Rankings of the largest deployed quantum systems by physical qubit count and system class.
When to consult it
A quick sense of the raw scale side of the field before drilling into fidelity or logical-qubit numbers.

Quantum Benchmark Zoo

Quantum apps
What it measures
Catalogue of quantum benchmarks (Quantum Volume, CLOPS, application suites) with per-benchmark definitions and links to sources.
When to consult it
Learning which benchmark measures what before comparing vendor claims.
Cadence: As publishedWhy link-out: License unclear or unspecified
Visit source →

MIT QIR — Processor Benchmarking

Quantum hardware
What it measures
Academic-flavoured processor benchmarking write-ups and comparisons from the MIT Quantum Index Report.
When to consult it
Deeper context on how independent researchers evaluate quantum processors.
Cadence: As publishedWhy link-out: License unclear or unspecified
Visit source →

CritPt — [[4,2,2]] QEC benchmark

Quantum apps
What it measures
Targeted [[4,2,2]] error-correction benchmark from the CritPt suite — 11 models compared on one canonical QEC problem.
When to consult it
A single-problem sanity check on QEC handling. Small enough to inspect end-to-end, complementary to the broader Quantum Advantage Tracker ingest.
Cadence: As publishedWhy link-out: License unclear or unspecified
Visit source →