Quantum

Index Report
2025
How to cite this report
Ruane, J., Kiesow, E., Galatsanos, J., Dukatz, C., Blomquist, E., Shukla, P., “The Quantum Index
Report 2025”, MIT Initiative on the Digital Economy, Massachusetts Institute of Technology,
Cambridge, MA, May 2025.

The Quantum Index Report 2025 by Massachusetts Institute of Technology is licensed under
CC BY-ND 4.0 Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International.

Interactive website and public data

The Quantum Index Report 2025 is accompanied with interactive tools available on our
website (qir.mit.edu) and we share our raw data with the community available to download from
our website (qir.mit.edu/data).

In memory of Shawneric Hachey, whose unique talent and dedication shaped the way this
project is presented today.

This work was supported by the Engineering Research Centers Program of the National Science Foundation under
NSF Cooperative Agreement No. 1941583. Any opinions, findings and conclusions or recommendations expressed in
this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the National Science Foundation.
Team
Jonathan Ruane, Principal Investigator and Editor-in-Chief
MIT Sloan School of Management
MIT Initiative on the Digital Economy

Elif Kiesow, Senior Researcher and Project Manager

MIT Initiative on the Digital Economy

Johannes Galatsanos, Researcher

MIT Initiative on the Digital Economy

Carl Dukatz
Accenture

Edward Blomquist
Accenture

Prashant Shukla
Accenture

This research is a collaboration between Accenture and the MIT Initiative on the Digital Economy (IDE) and was
performed under the MIT and Accenture Convergence Initiative for Industry and Technology.
 Introduction
2025 Quantum Index Report

1 | MIT INITIATIVE ON THE DIGITAL ECONOMY

Quantum technologies are evolving from theoretical concepts into tangible
technologies with commercial promise. Their rapid progress is capturing
global attention and suggests we stand on the cusp of a second quantum
revolution. While the first quantum revolution gave us the rules of the
quantum world and applied them to create groundbreaking technologies
such as semiconductors, lasers, MRI machines and atomic clocks, the
second quantum revolution, by contrast, focuses on controlling and
engineering quantum systems directly—such as using qubits for computing
or entangled photons for communication.

Unlocking the quantum opportunity is not simple. One challenge is that

quantum technologies can present a high barrier to understanding for non-
experts because they often rely on complex principles and concepts from
a variety of specialist fields, many of which don’t lend themselves easily
to analogy. Superposition and entanglement have no direct equivalence
in our everyday experience. This can lead business leaders, educators,
policymakers and others to feel quantum is ‘not for me’.
 Our vision for the Quantum Index
Report is to create a comprehensive,
data-driven assessment of the state
of quantum technologies.

3 | MIT INITIATIVE ON THE DIGITAL ECONOMY

 Vision
The Quantum Index Report aims to reduce the complexity and make it possible for a
wider audience to have a deeper understanding of the quantum landscape. Like most
transformative technologies, the success of quantum will depend not only on inventors,
physicists and engineers, but also on entrepreneurs, investors, designers, teachers, and
decision-makers who can help shape how the technology is developed, commercialized,
and governed. By making the field more accessible and inclusive, we stand a better
chance of realizing its full potential—for science, industry, and society at large.

Our vision for the Quantum Index Report is to create a comprehensive, data-driven
assessment of the state of quantum technologies. For this inaugural edition we have
focused on quantum computing and networking. The report tracks, measures, and
visualizes trends across research, development, education and public acceptance.
It aggregates data from academia, industry and policy sources and aims to provide
nonpartisan insights. Where possible, the underlying data behind this report is available
online where you will also find additional data and visualizations (www.qir.mit.edu).

Community
We look at activity in the quantum landscape through a broad range of perspectives.
We have aggregated publicly available data, contributed original data, and extracted
new metrics by combining data series. However, the challenges are substantial, the
field remains nascent and data is oftentimes sparse, difficult to gather, invisible to us or
non-existent. We acknowledge there are many limitations and biases, such as our US
focus in this edition. To achieve the broader goals of this project we need the support
of a global community, and invite you to participate in any way you can. We welcome
datasets, analysis, commentary or descriptions of what else you would like to see
included. Please connect via the Get-Involved section of our website (www.qir.mit.edu/
get-involved) or directly by email ([email protected]).

MIT’s motto is mens et manus, translated as “mind and hand”. This motto reflects
the ideals of the institute which promotes education and research for practical
application. The Quantum Index Report hopes to serve the quantum community with
this same ethos as we present the 2025 report with a commitment to bridge science,
commercialization, entrepreneurship and societal needs.

Jonathan Ruane

QUANTUM INDEX REPORT 2025 | 4

5 | MIT INITIATIVE ON THE DIGITAL ECONOMY
Table of Contents | 2025 Quantum Index Report

Key Insights page 7

Executive Summary page 9

Chapter 1 | Patents page 17

Chapter 2 | Academic Research page 24

Chapter 3 | Venture Funding page 41

Chapter 4 | Quantum in Corporate Communications page 47

Chapter 5 | Policy page 53

Chapter 6 | Workforce page 65

Chapter 7 | Education page 71

Chapter 8 | Public Opinion page 77

Chapter 9 | Quantum Networking page 89

Chapter 10 | Quantum Processor Benchmarking page 93

Appendix page 118

QUANTUM INDEX REPORT 2025 | 6

 Key Insights | 2025 Quantum Index Report

 Patents
Corporations and universities lead innovation efforts, accounting for 91% of
quantum computing patents.

 Academic Research
While China produces more papers overall in quantum computing,
American research tends to have greater impact and influence.

 Venture Funding
Quantum computing firms lead the sector, securing $1.6 billion in publicly
announced investments during 2024, followed by quantum software
companies with $621 million.

 Quantum in Corporate Communications

In corporate communications, there has been a marked increase in the
discussion of quantum computing over the last two years.

 Policy
While countries maintain unique approaches to quantum governance, they
face common challenges in balancing innovation promotion with security
concerns, leading to emerging hybrid governance models.

 Workforce
The US labor market shows strong growth, with quantum skills demand
almost tripling since 2018.

7 | MIT INITIATIVE ON THE DIGITAL ECONOMY

 Education
In higher education, Germany leads globally with master's programs
that include “quantum” in the degree name, followed by the UK and the
US. These three nations represent 45% of all quantum master’s degree
programs worldwide.

 Public Opinion
Public views on governance show strong support for private sector
involvement in quantum technology development, while expressing
skepticism about government oversight.

 Quantum Networking
Quantum Networking Testbeds play a crucial role in the development of
quantum networking and, by extension, the quantum internet. Currently, our
data identifies 28 quantum networking testbeds in the US and Europe.

 Quantum Processor Global Landscape

Two dozen manufacturers are commercially offering more than 40 quantum
processing units (QPUs) today. The United States leads the field, both in
terms of the number and diversity of QPUs, followed by China.

 Quantum Processor Benchmarks

Overall, quantum processing units (QPUs) are making impressive progress
in performance, but they remain far from meeting the requirements for
running large-scale commercial applications such as chemical simulations
or cryptanalysis.

QUANTUM INDEX REPORT 2025 | 8

Executive Summary
2025 Quantum Index Report
 Patents
The quantum technology patent landscape has shown remarkable growth and
concentration over recent years. Between 2016-2021, quantum computing patent family
filings increased by over 300%, while total quantum technology patents grew five-fold
from 2014 to 2024. Corporations and universities lead innovation efforts, accounting for
91% of quantum computing patents, with corporations holding 54% and universities 37%
of total filings. Geographically, China leads with 60% of patents as of 2024, followed by
the United States and Japan. The sector has evolved through distinct phases, from early
development between 1999-2004 to rapid expansion between 2013-2019. Recent trends
from 2020 to 2023 show universities reached a peak in total patent filings in 2023 while
corporate patents showed a decline as of 2023, suggesting potential market adjustments.

 Academic Research
The United States holds a leading position in quantum computing research output,
particularly in terms of research quality. In contrast, China has established itself as the
clear leader in quantum communications, with the United States following at a distance.
The research quality metrics also reveal interesting insights: while China produces more
papers overall in quantum computing, American research tends to have greater impact
and influence. These differences suggest strategic specialization, with the US focusing
on quantum computing and China prioritizing quantum communications, particularly
evident in China’s development of extensive satellite quantum communication
capabilities. European nations maintain significant research presence across both
areas, though typically trailing behind the two leaders in publication volume while
demonstrating strong research quality.
  Venture Funding
The quantum technology funding landscape has shown remarkable evolution and
growth in recent years, consistently surpassing previous milestones. 2024 was a
new high-water mark for the sector, although it is worth noting quantum represents
less than 1% of total venture capital funding worldwide. Quantum computing firms
lead the sector, securing $1.6 billion in publicly announced investments during 2024,
followed by quantum software companies with $621 million. The United States and
United Kingdom lead global investment with a combined share exceeding 60%
across 2012 to 2024. Recent notable investments include Australian firm PsiQuantum
securing $620 million in 2024. The structure of this particular deal highlights the
increasing role of public-private co-funding arrangements. While established
powers such as the US continue to invest, other players such as Canada and the
Netherlands show impressive commitment to the sector, indicating accelerated
expansion strategies and commercialization success.

 Quantum in Corporate Communications

Our data tracks mentions of quantum technology across more than 50,000 corporate
communications such as press releases and earnings calls. There has been a marked
increase in the discussion of quantum computing over the last two years. This trend
spans multiple document types, including news articles, and earnings calls, where
quantum computing references have shown significant growth. Industry leaders
are driving this dynamic, particularly IBM and NVIDIA. The increasing frequency of
quantum computing discussions in corporate communications suggests a growing
presence of the technology in mainstream business discourse, as companies
increasingly recognize its potential impact on future operations and competitive
advantage.

 Policy
The global quantum technology landscape reveals a complex interplay between
national sovereignty and international cooperation, with countries developing
distinct approaches while acknowledging the need for coordinated governance
frameworks. Major powers such as China (claimed $15 billion investment), the United
States (National Quantum Initiative), and the European Union (Quantum Flagship
program) have established comprehensive strategies, though priorities vary.

11 | MIT INITIATIVE ON THE DIGITAL ECONOMY

While countries maintain unique approaches to quantum governance, they face
common challenges in balancing innovation promotion with security concerns,
leading to emerging hybrid governance models. The future of quantum technology
policy appears to be moving toward increasingly sophisticated international
frameworks, with success depending on developing flexible structures that
can adapt to rapid technological advancements while maintaining trust among
participating nations.

 Workforce
The quantum technology sector is experiencing significant workforce development
change amid sustained demand growth, with major nations implementing
comprehensive strategies to address these needs. The US National Quantum
Initiative, places strong emphasis on workforce development, while Canada and
Australia have launched similar national quantum strategies focusing on labor
capacity expansion. The US labor market shows strong growth, with quantum skills
demand almost tripling since 2018, though stabilizing into a more moderate upward
trend. Key developments include the establishment of quantum hubs at universities,
specialized training programs connecting business managers with researchers, and
the emergence of a “quantum-as-a-service model” which aids experiential learning.
Despite initial rapid acceleration from 2018-2020, recent years show more stable
growth patterns, suggesting a leveling of demand.

 Education
Global quantum technology education is experiencing rapid expansion across all
educational levels, with significant developments in K-12 programs and higher
education. At the primary and secondary level, initiatives such as the National
Q-12 Education Partnership in the US, industry partnerships in China, and the EU’s
Quantum Flagship project are introducing quantum concepts to younger students. In
higher education, Germany leads globally with master programs with “quantum” in
the degree name, followed by the UK and the US. These three nations represent 45%
of all quantum master’s programs worldwide. Bachelor degree enrollment trends in
the US for QIST related disciplines shows strong growth especially in related topics
such as Computer Science while Electrical Engineering and Physics enrollments
remained stable. Some commentators suggest the field faces significant workforce
challenges in the future, highlighting the need for expanded domestic talent
pipelines while maintaining international recruitment capabilities.

QUANTUM INDEX REPORT 2025 | 12

  Public Opinion
Our survey of 1,375 US residents conducted in October 2024 reveals distinct public
perceptions about quantum computing and networking, showing a split between those
with domain knowledge and those who remain unfamiliar. Public awareness tends to
cluster at opposite ends of the spectrum, with either minimal exposure or significant
understanding of quantum computing. Emotional responses vary considerably across
different applications, with practical uses like materials discovery generating the
strongest enthusiasm, while security-related applications raise more concerns due to
their dual nature of potentially breaking current encryption methods while enabling new
security solutions. Public views on governance show strong support for private sector
involvement in quantum technology development, while expressing skepticism about
government oversight. Throughout the survey, consistent neutral responses suggest
widespread recognition that quantum computing represents a complex technology
whose ultimate societal impact remains uncertain for the general public.

 Quantum Networking
Quantum internet and quantum networking are emerging frontiers in quantum
information science. Quantum networking is the field of study and development
focused on enabling that quantum internet. Quantum networks make the transmission
of quantum information possible between devices and they allow the distribution of
quantum entanglement. Quantum networks will not replace classical communications
or the classical internet however they have potential to offer novel functionalities
such as more secure communication and the ability to connect quantum computers
for enhanced computing power. Quantum Networking Testbeds play a crucial role
in the development of quantum networking and, by extension, the quantum internet.
Currently, our data identifies 28 quantum networking testbeds in the US and Europe.
Testbeds are essential for advancing quantum networking because they provide realistic
environments in which to explore the performance, interoperability, and scalability of
quantum components. Investments in testbeds are not merely about testing hardware,
they also represent a commitment to advancing the foundational science and
engineering needed for a transformative quantum era. Beyond technical development,
testbeds also play a critical role in workforce training and industry engagement.

13 | MIT INITIATIVE ON THE DIGITAL ECONOMY

 Quantum Processor Global Landscape
Two dozen manufacturers are commercially offering more than 40 quantum processing
units (QPUs) today. The United States leads the field, both in terms of the number
and diversity of QPUs, followed by China. However, China’s commercially available
QPUs tend to be smaller and have lower performance compared to those from the US
and Europe. Within Europe, the UK, Netherlands, France, and Finland each have 4-6
commercial QPUs. In total, over 160 QPUs are currently in the prototype, planning, or
commercial stages, developed by close to 80 manufacturers across 17 countries. Among
the different QPU modalities, superconducting systems dominate the commercial
market, representing over 40% of available QPUs. However other modalities, such as
photonics, trapped ions, and especially neutral atoms and electron spins, are gaining
momentum; their share is expected to grow in the coming years.

 Quantum Processor Benchmarks

Overall, quantum processing units (QPUs) are making impressive progress in
performance, but they remain far from meeting the requirements for running large-scale
commercial applications such as chemical simulations or cryptanalysis. To evaluate
the maturity of different QPU offerings and modalities, multiple benchmarks must be
considered. One such metric is the number of qubits, which historically followed an
almost exponential growth trend. However, in recent years, especially within leading
modalities like superconducting and trapped-ion systems, this growth has slowed.
The industry focus has shifted toward building higher-performance machines by
improving error correction, gate and readout fidelity, and gate speed rather than merely
increasing qubit counts. Another important metric is fidelity, or the amount of errors
produced by a QPU. In particular trapped-ion systems have demonstrated the highest
fidelity operations and qubit connectivity and have set ambitious goals for further
improvements. However, they continue to face challenges with low qubit counts and
relatively slow gate speeds. Neutral atom platforms, a more recent entrant, have shown
promising qubit scalability while maintaining reasonable fidelities. Photonic systems,
still in the early stages, suggest the potential for high qubit counts, albeit with trade-offs
in fidelity and scaling costs. Across all current and planned QPU technologies, no single
modality or manufacturer has yet emerged as a clear leader. Each platform presents a
distinct set of strengths and limitations, and the race toward useful, scalable quantum
computing remains wide open.

QUANTUM INDEX REPORT 2025 | 14

  Recent Highlights

December 2024 Google February 2025 QuEra February 2025 Quantum

announces its Willow raises $230 million Machines announces that
chip with error correction financing to accelerate it has raised $170 million
below the surface code development of large- in Series C funding
threshold scale fault-tolerant
quantum computers

January 2025 UN February 2025 February 2025

International Year of Microsoft introduces Amazon Web
Quantum officially the Majorana 1 Services unveils
starts quantum processor its Ocelot
quantum chip

15 | MIT INITIATIVE ON THE DIGITAL ECONOMY

 Recent Highlights

March 2025 IonQ March 2025 NVIDIA April 2025 Spain

raises over $370 million announces plan to build launches its first National
in addition to its 2025 Quantum Computing Quantum Strategy backed
acquisition of ID Research Center in by €800 million
Quantique and Qubitekk partnership with labs at
that strengthen its Harvard, MIT, and Boston
quantum networking Quantum firms
capabilities

March 2025 Quantum April 2025 DARPA April 2025 IBM

Internet Alliance announces cooperation announces its plans
announces the first with nearly 20 to invest more
operating system quantum companies than $30 billion in
designed for quantum for its Quantum R&D to enhance
networks Benchmarking Initiative IBM's American
manufacturing of
mainframe and
quantum computers

QUANTUM INDEX REPORT 2025 | 16

 1 | Patents
As quantum technologies transition from the lab to the marketplace, patents and other
forms of Intellectual Property (IP) are becoming increasingly important strategic assets
in the race for quantum leadership. As well as serving as key indicators of general
innovation activity, the growth in volume of quantum-related patent filings reflects both
the maturing of research efforts and the intensifying competition among companies,
institutions, and nations.

17 | MIT INITIATIVE ON THE DIGITAL ECONOMY

The quantum IP landscape is being shaped
not only by traditional hardware systems
and foundational qubit architectures but
also by new frontiers such as quantum
error correction1, hybrid classical-quantum
algorithms2, and novel materials and qubit
fabrication processes.

This report tracks patent data based on patent families. A patent family consists
of multiple patent applications covering the same fundamental invention, filed in
different countries. Therefore patent families serve as a better metric for analyzing new
technology developments because they provide a comprehensive view of innovation
scope and global market intentions. Unlike individual patents, patent families account
for variations in filing requirements across jurisdictions. This interconnected structure
allows researchers to track how inventors protect their IP across international borders,
revealing both the breadth of innovation and possible geographic expansion plans.

Furthermore, patent families help normalize comparisons between regions with

different patent systems and requirements, offering a more accurate picture of global
innovation trends.

The data for this chapter was provided by Accenture Research in cooperation with
The Quantum Insider.

QUANTUM INDEX REPORT 2025 | 18

 1.1 | Patents by entity

Quantum computing patent families by origin, 1999-2023

Corporations have emerged as the high concentration around these two

dominant force in quantum computing categories. Individual inventors hold
patent development, demonstrating the third position with 3.6%, closely
significant investment in intellectual followed by government institutions at
property protection. Recent data shows 3.5%. Nonprofit organizations contribute
that global players such as IBM, Google, 1.5%, while hospitals and law firms show
Microsoft, Intel, and Baidu are among the minimal participation.
top patent filers.3
During the early development period
Corporate entities lead the landscape from 1999 to 2004, initial patents came
with 54% of total patents, followed by primarily from corporate and university
universities with 37%. Together, these two sectors, while government entities entered
sectors account for 91% of all quantum the patent landscape in 2002. This slow-
computing patents, demonstrating a growth period saw annual totals remain

Over the 2016–2021 period, quantum computing patent

4 family filings increased by over 300%.

19 | MIT INITIATIVE ON THE DIGITAL ECONOMY

 Quantum computing patent families by origin, 1999-2023

under 150 patent families, indicating evolution in patent activity. The corporate
the challenges associated with building sector reached its maximum of 1,570
research capabilities in the nascent field. patents in 2020, while universities
continued strong growth to reach 1,668
The transition period from 2005 to 2012
patents in 2023. Government participation
marked a significant shift in patent
accelerated notably after 2019. 2023 also
activity. Beginning in 2005, corporate
marked the first significant decline across
patents jumped notably. Individual
most categories except for universities,
inventors began making more substantial
suggesting potential market adjustments.
contributions after 2008.
Throughout this entire period, universities
A period of rapid expansion occurred and corporations consistently led patent
from 2013 to 2019 driven almost entirely development efforts, maintaining their
by corporations and universities. Recent positions as primary drivers of quantum
trends from 2020 to 2023 show continued computing innovation.

In 2023, 837 patent family filings were made by

4 corporations while 1668 were made by universities —
indicating substantial commitment to quantum technology
development by public and private institutions.
QUANTUM INDEX REPORT 2025 | 20
 1.2 | Patents by country

Quantum technology patents by country, 2014-2024

In the period 2014-2024, the total the beginning of a more rapid growth
number of quantum technology patent phase. This surge was driven by China
filings grew significantly, representing a with an expansion from 1,726 to 2,560
five-fold increase over this period. The patents, accompanied by increases in the
growth has been particularly pronounced United States and WPO.
since 2020.
The period from 2018 to 2020 saw
China emerged as the dominant location sustained growth momentum, including
for quantum technology patent filing, the emergence of India as a new player.
growing from 1,011 patents in 2014
The most recent years (2021-2024) have
to 7,308 in 2024. The United States
witnessed continued strong growth
maintained second position throughout
rates. China's leadership became
the period, increasing from 613 to 2,301
increasingly pronounced, while the
patents, while the World Patent Office
United States maintained strong growth,
secured third place, growing from 265 to
and India demonstrated accelerated
1,072 patents.
expansion.
Analyzing growth patterns during the
Throughout 2014-2024, the geographic
2014-2016 period, the total number of
distribution of patent activity has
patents grew moderately. This period
become increasingly concentrated.
saw relatively balanced growth across
China's market share expanded from
regions, with China holding a lead
42% in 2014 to 60% in 2024, while the
over the United States. A significant
United States maintained the second
acceleration occurred in 2017, marking

21 | MIT INITIATIVE ON THE DIGITAL ECONOMY

place with a relatively stable share around 19%, and the World Patent Office held steady
at approximately 9%. Together, these three entities controlled 88% of all quantum
computing patents in 2024, indicating a highly concentrated intellectual property
landscape in this technology sector. It is important to note that, in terms of individual
countries, Japan is placed as the third in total patent filing numbers after China and the
US across this period.

According to recent patent research reports by QuIC4 and by QEDC5, China has
established itself as the global leader in quantum communications patents. The country's
strong emphasis on quantum communications research likely resulted in significant
patent activity, with Chinese institutions leading the field. Organizations such as
QuantumCTek, Ruban Quantum Technology, and Beijing University of Posts & Telecom
are among the major patent holders in this domain.6

QED-C research on patents states that the US Patent and

Trademark Office (USPTO) has issued more quantum computing
patents than any other country’s office, and that the Chinese
patent office has issued the most quantum communications patents.

The disparity in patent numbers between China and the US highlights the competitive
dynamics in quantum technology development, with each nation pursuing different
aspects of the quantum technology ecosystem with different prioritization levels.

QUANTUM INDEX REPORT 2025 | 22

 1.3 | Future research
We intend to provide the community with ongoing monitoring of the rapidly evolving
quantum technology patent landscape. We aim to investigate geographic and market
concentration evolution, tracking emerging patent hubs and their technological
specializations. For future iterations of this section, we are interested in breaking down
patents by quantum technology subfields and analyzing patent families across different
technical classifications. Stakeholders interested in sharing data regarding these aspects
of the quantum technology patent landscape are encouraged to contact us.

You can reach us at [email protected].

 Footnotes
1 Matt Swayne, ‘US Leads in Steady Rise of Patents Covering Key Quantum Performance Measures’ (The Quantum Insider, 30 April
2024) <https://thequantuminsider.com/2024/04/30/us-leads-in-steady-rise-of-patents-covering-key-quantum-performance-
measures/> accessed 3 April 2025.

2 Yudong Cao, Jonathan P Olson and Eric R Anschuetz, ‘Hybrid Quantum-Classical Computer System and Method for Performing
Function Inversion’ <https://patents.google.com/patent/US20200394547A1/en> accessed 3 April 2025.

3 A Portrait of the Global Patent Landscape in Quantum Technologies’ (QuIC 2024) <https://www.euroquic.org/wp-content/
uploads/2024/03/QuIC-White-Paper-IPT-January-2024.pdf> accessed 4 February 2025.

4 ibid.

5 Elliott J Mason QED-C, ‘State of Quantum Industry Innovation – What Patents Tell Us’ (11 December 2024) <https://
quantumconsortium.org/blog/state-of-quantum-industry-innovation-what-patents-tell-us/> accessed 27 March 2025.

6 ibid.

23 | MIT INITIATIVE ON THE DIGITAL ECONOMY

2 | Academic Research
Academic publications serve as an early indicator of scientific progress, typically
preceding commercial applications in Quantum Technologies. Citation patterns
and collaborations in journal papers can highlight research quality, interdisciplinary
connections, and international partnerships shaping the field. Through comprehensive
analysis of publication metrics, researchers can identify emerging trends, assess
knowledge transfer mechanisms, and understand the evolution of quantum research
ecosystems globally. This chapter presents data on academic publications on quantum
computing and quantum communications based on research by the ASPI.1

Quantitative assessment of research output provides valuable insights into national

capabilities in quantum technologies. Total publication counts offer a broad perspective
on research activity levels across nations, reflecting the scale of investment in quantum
research infrastructure and the size of research communities. When combined with
H-index2 measurements and citation data3, which account for both productivity and
citation impact, these metrics reveal the depth and influence of research programs. This
dual perspective helps distinguish between quantity and quality of research output,
allowing for a nuanced understanding of each nation's contribution to the rapidly
developing quantum knowledge base.

QUANTUM INDEX REPORT 2025 | 24

 2.1 | Quantum computing

2.1.1. Rankings by published research

The US and China represent nearly half of all academic

publications in quantum computing. The European Union
accounts for 22% of global output. India, Japan and the
United Kingdom produce a large volume of research but
significantly trail the two global leaders.

The global landscape of quantum computing publications reveals a highly concentrated

distribution pattern, with China and the United States collectively accounting for nearly
half of all published research. China leads with 23% of publications, followed closely by
the US at 22%, while India emerges as the third major contributor with 5%. This top-
heavy distribution creates a clear tier structure in global quantum computing research
output.

The middle tier of contributors demonstrates significant diversity, with Germany and
Japan each contributing 5% and 4% respectively, followed by the United Kingdom at 4%.
Canada, Italy, and Russia each contribute 3% of global publications, forming a secondary
cluster of substantial contributors. This middle tier represents a crucial segment of global
quantum computing research, bridging the gap between the dominant players and
smaller contributors.

The lower tier of the distribution reveals a broad base of international participation,
with several countries each contributing 2% of global publications, including France,
Spain, Australia, South Korea, the Netherlands, and Switzerland, showing widespread
engagement across multiple regions staying active in quantum computing research.
The remaining countries, including Iran, Poland, Brazil, Austria, Singapore, Taiwan, Israel,
Saudi Arabia, and Denmark, each contribute 1%, forming a diverse foundation of global
participation in this field.

25 | MIT INITIATIVE ON THE DIGITAL ECONOMY

National share of quantum computing published research, 2019-2023

QUANTUM INDEX REPORT 2025 | 26

 2.1.2. Rankings by H-index

US quantum computing research quality is ranked highest in

the world, significantly ahead of other countries. China
ranks second with an H-index of 61, followed by the United
Kingdom with 46.

National quantum computing published research ranked by H-index, 2019-2023

27 | MIT INITIATIVE ON THE DIGITAL ECONOMY

In the landscape of quantum computing research quality measured by H-index,
the United States stands as the clear leader with an H-index of 104, demonstrating
exceptional research productivity and citation influence. This score reinforces why
American institutions are at the forefront of quantum computing advancement,
significantly outperforming all other nations.

Following the United States, China emerges in second position with an H-index of 61,
representing a substantial research presence. The top two nations highlight the current
state of global competition in quantum computing research.

The United Kingdom rounds out the top three positions with an H-index of 46,
demonstrating Europe's significant contribution to quantum computing research
excellence.

The middle tier of the distribution reveals intense activity among nations. Germany and
the Netherlands lead this group with H-index scores of 43 and 39 respectively, followed
closely by Canada and Japan, which tie at 38. Switzerland maintains a strong research
presence with an H-index of 35, and Australia contributes meaningfully at 34. France
completes this tier with an H-index of 31, demonstrating impressive research productivity
despite being slightly lower than its European counterparts.

QUANTUM INDEX REPORT 2025 | 28

 2.1.3. Rankings by most highly cited papers

Among the top 10% of the most highly cited papers in quantum
computing, the United States has the largest proportion
of publications with 34%. China follows with the second
highest proportion, 16%. The European Union accounts for an
estimated 17% of the global total.

By analyzing the country of origin of the top 10% most highly cited quantum computing
papers, we gain insight into where the field’s most influential ideas are emerging from.

The United States leads this group with 34% of the most highly cited quantum
computing publications, demonstrating exceptional research impact and influence.

China emerges as a strong second with 16% of highly cited publications, reinforcing its
position as the primary challenger to US research leadership. This position is noteworthy
as it represents a substantial gap between China and the next tier of countries. The
United Kingdom and Germany tie for third place with 6% each, illustrating Europe's
strong presence in high-impact quantum computing research.

The middle tier of the distribution shows interesting patterns of research excellence.
Japan and Canada each contribute 4% of highly cited publications, while Switzerland,
the Netherlands, India, and Australia form a closely grouped cluster at 3% each. This
relatively small spread among these countries suggests a competitive landscape where
institutions are achieving similar levels of citation impact despite their geographical and
institutional differences.

29 | MIT INITIATIVE ON THE DIGITAL ECONOMY

 National share of top 10% most highly cited quantum computing publications,
2019-2023

This distribution of highly cited publications reveals several key characteristics of

quantum computing research excellence. First, it shows a clear hierarchical structure
with the United States holding a dominant position, followed by China in a secondary
tier, and then a cluster of countries achieving similar levels of impact. Second, it
demonstrates that research excellence isn't solely determined by absolute size or
resources, as evidenced by smaller nations such as the Netherlands maintaining a strong
position. Finally, it highlights the internationally diverse nature of high-impact quantum
computing research, with representation from North America, Europe, and Asia-Pacific
regions. This suggests a globalized research ecosystem, albeit one with a concentration
of leadership from developed nations.

QUANTUM INDEX REPORT 2025 | 30

 2.1.4. Rankings overall

The United States demonstrates remarkable consistency across all three metrics, placed
among leaders in total publications (22%), and in top position in the H-index (104), and
highly cited publications (34%). This strong leadership position suggests not only high
research productivity but also exceptional research quality and impact.

China presents an intriguing case of varying performance across metrics. While leading
in total publications (23%), it ranks second in highly cited publications (16%) and drops
to second place in H-index (61). This pattern suggests that while Chinese institutions
produce the highest volume of research, they haven't yet achieved the same level of
citation impact as US institutions.

European nations show distinct patterns across the metrics. The United Kingdom, for
instance, ranks third in H-index (46) but wasn't among the top contributors in total
publications, indicating high-quality research despite lower publication volumes.
Conversely, Germany ranked fourth in H-index (43) while maintaining fifth place in
publication count (5%), showing strong consistency across both metrics. The Netherlands
demonstrates exceptional efficiency, ranking fifth in H-index (39) despite being absent
from the top publication counts, suggesting highly impactful research despite moderate
publication volume.

Japan offers another compelling case study, appearing in the middle tier of both rankings
(tied for sixth in H-index at 38 and seventh in publications at 4%). This consistency
suggests a balanced approach to research quality and quantity. Canada maintains similar
positioning in both metrics (seventh in H-index at 38 and eighth in publications at 3%),
demonstrating steady performance across both dimensions.

31 | MIT INITIATIVE ON THE DIGITAL ECONOMY

Quantum computing research rankings overview

QUANTUM INDEX REPORT 2025 | 32

 2.2 | Quantum communications

2.2.1. Rankings by published research

China publishes over one-third of all quantum communications

research whereas the United States follows as a distant
second. The European Union accounts for 21% of the global
total publications. UK, Germany and India are the only
others generating 5% of the global output.

China has emerged as the dominant contributing 5% of total publications,

force in quantum communications demonstrating balanced research output
research output with an impressive 39% across these major scientific powers.
of total publications. This substantial
The middle tier of the distribution
lead is particularly notable given that
shows interesting patterns of research
quantum communications represents
engagement. Russia, Japan, Italy,
a specialized area within quantum
and Canada each contribute 3% of
technology, suggesting deliberate and
publications, forming a secondary cluster
targeted research efforts and significant
of substantial contributors. South Korea,
institutional capacity. This research
Spain, and Austria follow with 2% each,
effort has likely aided China’s success
while France, Australia, Switzerland,
in deploying space-based quantum
Singapore, the Netherlands, Poland, Iran,
communications that utilize satellites and
and Denmark complete the distribution
long distance QKD networks.
with 1% each. This broad international
The United States follows as a distant participation suggests a vibrant global
second with 12% of publications, while research ecosystem in quantum
the United Kingdom, Germany, and India communications, though with clear tiers
form a closely grouped cluster, each of research intensity.

33 | MIT INITIATIVE ON THE DIGITAL ECONOMY

National share of quantum communications published research, 2019-2023

QUANTUM INDEX REPORT 2025 | 34

 2.2.2. Rankings by H-index

In quantum communications, China leads in terms of research

quality with an H-index of 51, ahead of the US which takes
the second place with 39. Germany and the United Kingdom
follow with H-index of 27 and 26, respectively.

National quantum communications published research ranked by H-index, 2019-2023

35 | MIT INITIATIVE ON THE DIGITAL ECONOMY

China stands as the leader in the field, with an H-index of 51, demonstrating exceptional
research productivity and citation influence. This score places Chinese institutions such
as the University of Science and Technology (USTC) firmly at the forefront of quantum
communications advancement, significantly outperforming all other nations.

Following China's lead, the United States emerges as a strong second with an H-index
of 39, representing a substantial research presence despite being notably lower than
China's figure. The top two nations highlight the current state of global competition in
quantum computing research.

The middle tier of the distribution reveals intense competition among European nations
and Japan. Germany leads this group with an H-index of 27, followed closely by the
United Kingdom at 26. The Netherlands maintains a strong research presence with an
H-index of 21, while Austria contributes meaningfully at 20. Canada demonstrates an
H-index of 19, while Italy and Japan tie at 17, suggesting balanced research ecosystems
outside the leading powers. Switzerland completes this tier with an H-index of 16,
demonstrating consistent research productivity despite being slightly lower than
European counterparts.

QUANTUM INDEX REPORT 2025 | 36

 2.2.3. Rankings by most highly cited papers

China has a third of the top 10% of the most highly cited
quantum communications publications. The United States
follows with 17%. The combined European nations account for
28% of the global total.

National share of top 10% most highly cited quantum communications publications,
2019-2023

Regarding the pattern of global research leadership based on the top 10% most cited
publications, China stands prominently at the forefront, accounting for 34% of this field.
The United States follows as a strong second, contributing 17% of these influential works,
while Germany rounds out the top three with 7%. Together, these three nations dominate
the landscape of quantum communications research excellence, collectively producing
58% of the field's most impactful publications.

37 | MIT INITIATIVE ON THE DIGITAL ECONOMY

2.2.4. Rankings overall insights

Quantum communications research rankings overview

51

39

27
26

21
20
19
17
16

China dominates the quantum communications field with 39% of total publications,
significantly outpacing the next closest contributor, the United States, which accounts
for 12% of global output. This substantial gap in publication volume is matched by
differences in research quality metrics, where China achieves an H-index of 51 and
places 34% of its publications in the top 10% most-cited works. The United States
exemplifies high-quality research with an H-index of 39 and 17% of publications in the
top 10%, despite lower publication volume compared to China.

European countries show varying levels of performance in quantum communications

research. Germany leads as the strongest European contributor with 5% of global
publications and an H-index of 27, followed by Austria and the United Kingdom, each
contributing 5%. Notably, smaller European nations demonstrate efficiency in research
quality despite lower publication volumes: Austria achieves 4% of publications in the top
10%, while the Netherlands maintains an impressive H-index of 21 despite contributing
only 1% of global publications.

QUANTUM INDEX REPORT 2025 | 38

 2.3 | Quantum computing vs. quantum communications research

The US maintains leadership in quantum computing research

while China leads in quantum communications.

Quantum computing published Quantum communications

research by region published research by region

China demonstrates leadership in quantum communications with 39% of publications,

while maintaining a lower, but still significant position in quantum computing at
23%. This difference of 16 percentage points suggests a strategic focus on quantum
communications research in China, likely achieved by specific national priorities and
infrastructure investment.

The United States shows an interesting inverse pattern. While ranking second in
quantum communications with 12% of publications, it is among the leaders in quantum
computing at 22%. This reversal might indicate different strategic priorities between the
two nations, with the US maintaining stronger leadership in quantum computing while
China focuses more intensively on quantum communications.

European nations present distinct patterns across both fields. Germany and the United
Kingdom maintain consistent performance with 5% in both areas, suggesting a balanced
approach across the quantum subspecialties.

39 | MIT INITIATIVE ON THE DIGITAL ECONOMY

2.4 | Future research

We are interested in extending our analysis by looking into quantum computing and
quantum communications subfields, examining how research productivity and quality
vary across specialized subdomains. By mapping publication patterns and quality
metrics onto these specialized areas, we will better understand the complex interplay
between theoretical foundations and practical applications, potentially revealing
emerging trends and opportunities for innovation that might be obscured at the broader
field level. We invite contributions from the quantum research community to future
editions of this report.

You can reach us at [email protected].

 Footnotes
1 Gaida, J., Wong-Leung, J., & Robin, S. (2023). Critical technology tracker. Who Is Leading the Critical Technology Race. A Project by
the Australian Strategic Policy Institute. https://techtracker.aspi.org.au

2 Ibid, H-index (Hirsch index) is an established performance metric used for analyzing the impact of scholarly output. It’s a combined
measure of quantity and impact. To calculate H-index, a set of papers (e.g. all those on quantum computing from a particular country
over a certain time period) has an H-index of N if the relevant authors have published N papers that have N or more citations each.
The H-index is based on Times Cited data from the Web of Science database. It will not include citations from non-indexed resources.

3 The top 10% of the most highly cited papers were analyzed to generate insights into which countries are publishing the greatest
share of high-quality, innovative and high-impact research. Credit for each publication was divided among authors and their
affiliations and not assigned only to the first author (for example, if there were two authors, they would each be assigned half the
allocation). Fractional allocation of credit was used for all metrics.

QUANTUM INDEX REPORT 2025 | 40

 3 | Venture Funding
Financial investment is a critical resource for the development of early stage quantum
firms. The embryonic profile of the technology, the field's inherent complexity, and the
long-term nature of its development generally make it more suitable for specialist,
patient investors.

Our data, compiled in collaboration with Accenture and The Quantum Insider, focuses
mainly on publicly available funding announcements from open media sources (press
releases, articles, etc). Not all entities fully disclose their funding details, and challenges
remain in terms of data gathering and classification (e.g. "Other" category in 2024 data
on page 42). Investment levels within large companies such as Google, IBM, Microsoft,
or Amazon are not known—and these are some of the largest scale actors in the space.

Within our dataset, total funding for quantum technologies first peaked in 2021.
Although there was a decline of approximately 40% in 2023, the sector quickly
recovered and reached a new peak in 2024. Quantum computing firms have generated
the highest share of overall funding compared to other quantum technologies such
as quantum communications and security firms (e.g. quantum networking) and
software firms (e.g. quantum algorithms). Despite the growth in recent years, quantum
technology investment still represents only a tiny fraction of total venture funding (<1%).

Despite the growth in recent years,

quantum technology investment still
represents only a tiny fraction of total
venture funding (<1%).

41 | MIT INITIATIVE ON THE DIGITAL ECONOMY

3.1 | Quantum technology funding landscape by round
Quantum technology funding landscape by round, 2012-2024

* The ‘Other’ funding category encompasses a wide variety of investments that either did not fit discreetly into the standard
classification groups or was not precisely reported. Individual investments are sometimes complex and opaque as companies may
secure funding from multiple sources simultaneously which have different terms and structures. There are also a wide variety of
sources including government, institutional, traditional venture capital, grant aid, or quasi-debt. Due to the evolving nature of quantum
funding structures in 2024, a number of transactions that might otherwise be categorized under ‘Late Venture‘ have been included in
‘Other’ to maintain consistency with earlier data and emerging patterns.

The quantum technology funding landscape has undergone multiple transformations

over the past decade, marked by periods of explosive growth punctuated by strategic
corrections. The journey began with modest investments in 2012, followed by rapid
acceleration in 2014, establishing the foundation for future growth.

QUANTUM INDEX REPORT 2025 | 42

 After a brief correction in 2018, the sector entered a new phase. 2019 marked a recovery.
The significant inflection point in the market occurred in 2020 when total funding
approximately doubled compared to the previous year. This continued in 2021 when
it roughly tripled again. Spikes in 2021 and 2022 were somewhat driven by quantum
computing companies going public in the form of Special Purpose Acquisition Companies
(SPACs). These are atypical funding vehicles that are unlikely to occur on a regular basis
going forward. Significant SPAC examples included IonQ and Rigetti in 2021 and D-Wave
in 2022.

Quantum technology funding has shown remarkable growth and diversification across
various investment categories from 2012 to 2024. The total quantum technology
investment landscape is dominated by "Other" funding sources, which account for
30% of all investments, followed by Series A funding at 17% and Series B at 14%. Seed
investments represent 10% of the total funding, while Series C rounds contribute 9%, and
SPAC/IPO activities account for 8%. Non-dilutive funding and Late Venture investments
make up smaller portions at 7% and 4%, respectively.

Non-dilutive funding has grown substantially over time, increasing from minimal amounts
in early years to reach significant levels, with its highest point at $500 million in 2021.
SPAC/IPO activities, while less frequent, represent major funding milestones, with
investments reaching $693 million in 2021.

This evolution might reflect the maturation of quantum technology companies,

transitioning from early-stage venture funding to later stage capital structures. The sector
has demonstrated substantial resilience, with each temporary downturn serving as a
stepping stone for a rebound and further growth.

3.2 | Quantum technology venture funding by category

The quantum technology sector has experienced significant shifts in investment patterns
over the past decade. Quantum computers have generated the highest share of overall
funding compared to other technologies such as quantum networks and software.

The data shows strong growth in 2024, particularly amongst Quantum computing
firms which received $1.59 billion in investments across the year. Quantum software
investments also showed remarkable growth in 2024, reaching $621 million.

Several major investments during 2021-2022 marked significant milestones in the

sector's development. In January 2021, Quantinuum secured a $300 million equity

43 | MIT INITIATIVE ON THE DIGITAL ECONOMY

 Quantum technology funding landscape by category, 2014-2024

investment, achieving a pre-money valuation of $5 billion.1 This round drew participation

from prominent investors including JPMorgan Chase, Mitsui & Co., Amgen, and
Honeywell. Later that same year, PsiQuantum attracted $450 million in funding from
Temasek, BlackRock, Microsoft, and other strategic partners.2

In 2022, Finland-based IQM Quantum Computers raised €128 million including a

venture loan from the European Investment Bank and participation from World Fund,
Bayern Kapital, and Tencent.3 IQM provides full-stack quantum computing systems to
supercomputing data centres, research institutes, universities, and enterprises.

More recently, in April 2024, the Australian Commonwealth and Queensland

Governments made a substantial commitment to the sector, investing $620 million
in PsiQuantum through a financial package consisting of equity, grants, and loans to
support the development of a utility-scale quantum computer.

QUANTUM INDEX REPORT 2025 | 44

 3.3 | Quantum technology funding landscape by countries

The global quantum technology funding landscape has evolved into a significant
international competition, with multiple countries making substantial investments to
secure their position in this emerging field.

Quantum technology funding landscape by top 10 countries, 2012-2024

The United States and United Kingdom lead the field with a combined share of more
than 60% of total funding across 2012 to 2024. The US headquartered firms secured
$4.94 billion, followed by UK ventures at $1.6 billion. Canada ranks third with $1.2 billion.
At the next level down, France ($606 million), the Netherlands ($540 million), Australia
($412 million), and China ($398 million) form a middle tier, while Israel ($352 million),
Finland ($334 million) and Germany ($303 million) are clustered just behind.

The funding history over time shows that most countries maintained very modest but
relatively stable investment levels until 2016, after which they adopted either steady
growth trajectories or pursued clear bursts of increased funding.

45 | MIT INITIATIVE ON THE DIGITAL ECONOMY

The recent growth patterns reveal a different dynamic between established and
emerging players. While the major nations maintain substantial absolute funding levels,
several smaller nations demonstrate remarkable growth trajectories. Australia leads with
the highest growth rate, reflecting an assertive investment strategy with substantial
government support. In contrast, despite their larger absolute investments, the US
and UK demonstrate more moderate growth in recent years. This suggests that while
established powers maintain their position through sustained investment, smaller nations
are dedicated to closing the gap through accelerated funding increases.

The consistent upward trend in investment across a wide range of nations in recent years
indicates growing global recognition of quantum technology's strategic importance
as well as the desire to build firms that can translate scientific research efforts into
commercial success.

3.4 | Future research

Given the relatively small annual volume of quantum venture deals internationally, there
will be gaps in reporting. Improving data gathering is an opportunity for the community
in general. If you have data that would aid this endeavor and enrich future Quantum
Index Reports please contact the QIR team.

Building on our analysis, several important research areas emerge for future
investigation, including cross-country comparative studies to investigate the relationship
between basic science investment, workforce development and startup emergence in
quantum (linkages between research, talent and capital), investment impact analysis to
quantify relationships between funding patterns and delivery of technological milestones,
and the role played by corporate and strategic investors.

You can reach us at [email protected].

 Footnotes
1 ‘Honeywell Announces the Closing of $300 Million Equity Investment Round for Quantinuum at $5B Pre-Money Valuation’ <https://
www.quantinuum.com/press-releases/honeywell-announces-the-closing-of-300-million-equity-investment-round-for-quantinuum-
at-5b-pre-money-valuation> accessed 28 March 2025.

2 ‘PsiQuantum Raises $450 Million to Build Its Quantum Computer’ (PsiQuantum) <https://www.psiquantum.com/news-import/
psiquantum-raises-450-million-to-build-its-quantum-computer> accessed 3 April 2025.

3 ‘European Quantum Computing Leader IQM Raises €128m Led by World Fund to Help Combat the Climate Crisis | Press Releases
IQM’ <https://www.meetiqm.com/newsroom/press-releases/european-leader-in-quantum-computing-iqm-raises-128m-led-by-
world-fund> accessed 3 April 2025.

QUANTUM INDEX REPORT 2025 | 46

 4 | Quantum in Corporate
Communications

47 | MIT INITIATIVE ON THE DIGITAL ECONOMY

QUANTUM INDEX REPORT 2025 | 48
 4.1 | Mentions in corporate communications

Over the past two years, there has been a significant surge in mentions of quantum
computing across corporate communications, with news sources showing particularly
pronounced increases. This trend might be reflecting growing business interest in quan-
tum technology. The data for this section was compiled in collaboration with Accenture.

Total documents mentioning "quantum computing," 2022-2024

According to the analysis of 58,070 company documents

between 2022 and 2024, the frequency of quantum computing
references has shown consistent upward momentum, suggesting
an expanding awareness and importance of quantum concepts
into mainstream business discourse.

The increase in quantum computing mentions spans multiple types of corporate

communications, with especially notable growth in news-related content. Expert
calls and research documents demonstrate heightened engagement with quantum
technology discussions. This broad-based increase suggests that quantum computing

49 | MIT INITIATIVE ON THE DIGITAL ECONOMY

is becoming progressively integrated began at 335 mentions, followed by
into various aspects of corporate a slight increase to 342 mentions in
communication, moving beyond purely the second quarter. The third quarter
technical contexts to enter mainstream reached 367 mentions, and the fourth
business dialogue. quarter achieved the highest quarterly
mean of the entire period at 379
The quarterly mean analysis of the
mentions. This represents a significant
company documents reveals distinct
acceleration in the frequency of quantum
patterns across the three-year period.
computing mentions, with 2024's
In 2022, the year began with a quarterly
quarterly means consistently exceeding
mean of 203 mentions, characterized by
those of previous years by a substantial
significant monthly fluctuations between
margin.
114 and 262 mentions. The second
quarter maintained a similar level at The overall trend shows a clear
192 mentions, showing more consistent progression from relatively stable
monthly values ranging from 157 to 239 quarterly means in 2022 (ranging from
mentions. The third quarter mean slightly 179 to 203 mentions) to moderate growth
increased to 203 mentions, with monthly in 2023 (198 to 256 mentions) and finally
values between 170 and 244 mentions, to substantial increases in 2024 (335 to
while the fourth quarter showed a slight 379 mentions). This pattern suggests
decline to 178.67 mentions, ranging from an accelerating adoption of quantum
132 to 222 mentions. computing discussions in company
documents, with the most pronounced
The pattern shifted notably in 2023, with
growth occurring in the latter half of
the first quarter showing 198 mentions,
the period.
followed by a modest increase to 206
mentions in the second quarter. The third The steady rise in quantum computing
quarter demonstrated stronger growth, mentions across different document
reaching 215 mentions, while the fourth types might be indicating a shift in
quarter showed the highest quarterly how businesses approach and discuss
mean of the year at 256 mentions. This quantum technology. While research
upward trend in 2023's quarterly means documents naturally maintain high levels
indicates a gradual but consistent of quantum computing references, the
increase in quantum computing mentions significant increase in mentions across
across company documents. other document categories, news articles
in particular, might be suggesting a
The more significant changes occurred
maturing of the technology's presence in
in 2024, with each quarter showing
corporate communications.
substantial increases. The first quarter

This trend aligns with the growing commercial interest in

quantum computing, as companies increasingly recognize its
potential impact on future business operations.

QUANTUM INDEX REPORT 2025 | 50

 4.1.1. Mentions in earnings calls

The growth in quantum computing mentions during earnings calls represents a

significant trend in corporate communications within the period 2011-2024. After an
insignificant number of mentions in the first years, and starting from just 4 mentions
in Q1 2016, the number has grown substantially to reach 25 mentions in Q1 2024,
demonstrating a six-fold increase over this eight-year period.

This steady rise in mentions aligns with the broader pattern of increasing quantum
computing discussion across corporate communications, where news sources have
shown particularly pronounced increases. The trend is supported by concrete evidence
of major corporations actively incorporating quantum computing into their strategic
discussions, with companies like IBM establishing dedicated quantum facilities and
launching new quantum-focused initiatives.1

Total earnings calls mentioning "quantum computing," 2011-2024

35

30

25

20

15

10

0
04 11

10 12

04 12

10 13

04 13

10 14

04 14

10 15

04 15

10 16

04 16

10 17

04 17

10 18

04 18

10 19

04 19

10 20

04 20

10 21

04 21

10 22

04 22

10 23

04 23

10 24

4
02
0

0
-2

-2

-2

-2

-2

-2

-2

-2

-2

-2

-2

-2

-2

-2

-2

-2

-2

-2

-2

-2

-2

-2

-2

-2

-2

-2

-2
10

The growth in earnings call mentions reflects an increasing and broader commercial
interest in quantum computing. It has been accompanied by significant market
expansion projections; for example, a 2024 report from Technavio estimated the
global quantum computing market will grow by $17.34 billion (USD) from 2024 to
2028, a compound annual growth rate of 26%.2 The market has also seen sustained
and substantial startup investment, for example a $300 million equity injection for
Quantinuum in 2024.3

51 | MIT INITIATIVE ON THE DIGITAL ECONOMY

4.1.2. Quantum computing mentions by company
Total document count company (top 50)

IBM and Alphabet stand out as the leading firms in terms of producing external commu-
nications, as measured by number of documents (e.g. press releases or earnings calls)
mentioning quantum computing. They are followed by IonQ in the third place, D-Wave in
the fourth place, and Quantum Computing Inc. in the fifth place completing the top five.
Microsoft, NVIDIA, Rigetti, SEALSQ, and Samsung complete the top ten.

4.2 | Future research

We look forward to expanding this research in the future editions of this report. We
are interested in analyzing industry-specific patterns in quantum technology adoption
messaging, examining cross-industry collaboration patterns in quantum technology
communications and exploring other relevant trends that might align with mentions in
corporate communications.

You can reach us at [email protected].

 Footnotes
1 ‘Embracing the Quantum Economy: A Pathway for Business Leaders’ (World Economic Forum 2025) Insight Report <https://reports.
weforum.org/docs/WEF_Embracing_the_Quantum_Economy_2024.pdf> accessed 2 February 2025.

2 Technavio https://www.technavio.com, ‘Quantum Computing Market Growth Analysis Research Report - Historical & Forecast 2024
- 2028’ <https://www.technavio.com/report/quantum-computing-market-industry-analysis> accessed 28 March 2025.

3 ‘Honeywell Announces the Closing of $300 Million Equity Investment Round for Quantinuum at $5B Pre-Money Valuation’ <https://
www.quantinuum.com/press-releases/honeywell-announces-the-closing-of-300-million-equity-investment-round-for-quantinuum-
at-5b-pre-money-valuation> accessed 28 March 2025.

QUANTUM INDEX REPORT 2025 | 52

 5 | Policy
National governments around the world are increasingly recognizing quantum
technologies as a domain of strategic importance—one that intersects with economic
competitiveness, national security, and scientific leadership. As a result, quantum policy
is no longer confined to academic funding or isolated research programs. It is becoming
a centerpiece of industrial strategy, with countries racing to define and implement
national quantum initiatives, invest in infrastructure, and shape global standards. This
policy momentum reflects a broader geopolitical dynamic, where early movers aim to
secure technological sovereignty and influence the trajectory of the quantum future.

Policy frameworks worldwide face common challenges in managing quantum

technology development. One critical issue is the tension between promoting
innovation and ensuring security. Nations must balance the need to protect sensitive
quantum research with the requirement for international collaboration to advance
the field. In 2024, several countries, including the US, Australia, UK, Canada and the
Netherlands imposed aligned export controls on quantum technologies.1

Most countries have pursued largely independent approaches to their quantum plans.
In contrast, the European Union's Quantum Flagship2 program serves as a model for
coordinated continental-level quantum research, pooling national resources while
maintaining a shared framework for ethical oversight and societal impact. The future
of quantum technology policy making will likely involve increasingly sophisticated
international frameworks. Current trends suggest a move toward hybrid models
that combine national sovereignty with international cooperation. This evolution in
governance approaches reflects the unique nature of quantum technologies, which
demand high levels of international cooperation especially at the research level, while
simultaneously respecting legitimate national security concerns.

53 | MIT INITIATIVE ON THE DIGITAL ECONOMY

In order to provide a focused analysis of the global policy landscape,
this chapter zooms in on policies of seven countries, two leading
players in the quantum technology space, the US and China; three
anglophone economies with comprehensive national policies in
quantum technologies, the UK, Canada and Australia; and two
important players serving as European technology hubs, the
Netherlands and Ireland.

QUANTUM INDEX REPORT 2025 | 54

 5.1 | United States
The United States has established a comprehensive framework for quantum technology
policy development through the National Quantum Initiative (NQI), launched in 2018.3
This whole-of-government approach coordinates contributions from across federal
departments and agencies through either the National Science and Technology Council
(NSTC) Subcommittee on Quantum Information Science or the NSTC Subcommittee on
Economic and Security Implications of Quantum Science. Recent policy developments
have strengthened this framework, notably through the CHIPS and Science Act of 2022,
which authorized quantum networking infrastructure development and STEM education
integration. The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for fiscal year 2022 further
expanded the initiative's scope by formalizing the NSTC Subcommittee on the Economic
and Security Implications of Quantum Science.

Cybersecurity is a central pillar of US quantum technology policy, particularly in

light of emerging threats to classical encryption systems. The President's National
Security Memorandum 10, released in May 2022, established comprehensive policies
for promoting quantum computing leadership while addressing cryptographic
vulnerabilities.4 The policy emphasizes transitioning to quantum-resistant cryptography
and protecting sensitive technological information, with particular concern about
adversaries potentially collecting encrypted data for future decryption. International
cooperation has become increasingly important, with strategic documents highlighting
the need for dedicated funding mechanisms and enhanced interagency coordination of
international practices.5

Another crucial pillar of US quantum technology policy is international cooperation. The

US government has signed bilateral quantum cooperation statements with Australia,
Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Japan, South Korea, the Netherlands, Sweden,
Switzerland, and the United Kingdom.6 These bilateral partnerships facilitate high-level
dialogues between relevant government agencies and create opportunities for enhanced
collaboration between research institutions, universities, and industry.

In 2024, the US issued new export controls relating to quantum technologies.7 The
restrictions apply to quantum computers and a broad range of associated items
including “related equipment, components, materials, software, and technology that can
be used in the development and maintenance of quantum computers."

Overall, the US approach aims to balance national interests with global collaboration—
promoting mutual benefits while protecting intellectual capital and property.

55 | MIT INITIATIVE ON THE DIGITAL ECONOMY

5.2 | Australia
Australia has launched a comprehensive National Quantum Strategy that aims to
transform the nation's future through technological advancement. The strategy
was developed through extensive consultation with the quantum sector and wider
community before its release in May 2023.8 By 2030, Australia aims to be recognized as
a leader of the global quantum industry, with quantum technologies becoming integral
to a prosperous, fair, and inclusive Australia. The strategy identifies both opportunities
and challenges, including the potential to capitalize on existing expertise, build sovereign
capability, and benefit from economic growth through increased productivity, while
addressing challenges in commercialization, capital attraction, infrastructure access, and
skills development.

The strategy is built around five central themes that will guide actions over seven
years: creating thriving research and development, securing essential quantum
infrastructure and materials, building a skilled workforce, establishing supportive
standards and frameworks that support national interests, and building a trusted, ethical
ecosystem. Key initiatives include investing in quantum ecosystem growth, supporting
commercialization, and establishing new programs to incentivize quantum use cases.
The government has committed significant resources, including earmarking at least
$1 billion from the $15 billion National Reconstruction Fund for critical technologies.
Implementation will be collaborative, drawing on the strengths of industry, businesses,
universities, states, territories, and trusted international partners to ensure Australia
realizes its quantum opportunity.

In 2024, Australia imposed export controls on quantum by the expansion of its “Defence
and Strategic Goods List” dual-use section Category 4 (Computers) to include quantum
computers.9

5.3 | Canada
Canada has launched a comprehensive National Quantum Strategy backed by a $360
million investment over seven years, positioning the country to maintain its competitive
position in quantum research and technology development.10 This builds on the fact that
Canada has a number of globally recognized academic institutions with strong quantum
research efforts, such as the University of Waterloo and University of Toronto. It is also
the home to quantum firms such as D-Wave and Xanadu.

The Canadian strategy is built on three interrelated pillars: research, talent, and
commercialization, which support key missions that will guide Canada's quantum
development. The initiative aims to strengthen Canada's existing quantum research
capabilities while growing domestic quantum technologies, companies, and talent, with
particular focus on making Canada a world leader in quantum computing hardware and
software development.
QUANTUM INDEX REPORT 2025 | 56
 The strategy's three missions focus on specific technological areas: (1) developing and
deploying quantum computing hardware and software, (2) establishing a national secure
quantum communications network with post-quantum cryptography capabilities, and
(3) supporting the development and early adoption of quantum sensing technologies.
Implementation will be supported through various programs, including the Natural
Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC) quantum streams, the
National Research Council's Quantum Research and Development Initiative (QRDI), and
Canada's Global Innovation Clusters. The strategy emphasizes collaboration between
academia, industry, and government, with a focus on creating thousands of jobs and
establishing Canada as a global leader in quantum technologies.

According to national strategy, Canada is also committed to strengthening country-to-

country collaboration both bilaterally and multilaterally, with an emphasis on key allied
countries. This should not only permit jointly advancing knowledge, but also position
Canada to work towards ensuring the interoperability of these technologies. The strategy
envisions Canada playing a central role in emerging supply chains, with attention paid to
protecting sensitive technologies where deemed necessary.

In 2024, Canada implemented export controls on quantum technologies with an update

to its export control list, adding quantum computers.11

5.4 | United Kingdom

The UK's National Quantum Strategy, published in March 2023, outlines a comprehensive
10-year vision to establish the UK as a leading quantum-enabled economy.12 The strategy
builds on the UK's existing quantum strengths, with the government dedicating £2.5
billion to its quantum research and innovation program over ten years. The first two
years will see £25 million targeted at training skilled quantum workers through quantum-
related fellowships and doctoral training.

The UK has already established itself as a significant player in quantum technology, with
approximately 160 companies in the quantum sector and the second-highest percentage
of private equity investment in quantum computing globally, second only to the US.13

The strategy focuses on five key missions:14 developing UK-based quantum computers
capable of running 1 trillion operations by 2035; deploying the world's most advanced
quantum network at scale by 2035; implementing quantum sensing solutions in every
National Health Service (NHS) Trust by 2030; deploying quantum navigation systems
on aircraft by 2030; and lastly, implementing mobile, networked quantum sensors
across critical infrastructure sectors (transport, telecoms, energy, and defense sectors)
by 2030. These missions are supported by the National Quantum Technology Program
(NQTP)15, which connects government, academia, and industry to accelerate quantum
technology development and commercialization. The strategy emphasizes collaboration
between academia and industry, with partnerships involving prominent institutions

57 | MIT INITIATIVE ON THE DIGITAL ECONOMY

and companies while maintaining a strong focus on responsible development and
international cooperation.

In 2024, the UK announced export controls on quantum technologies by including

quantum computers under the section “Computers and related equipment, materials,
software and technology” via amendments to its Export Control Order.16

5.5 | The Netherlands

The Netherlands has established a comprehensive quantum strategy through Quantum
Delta NL, a National Growth Fund program focused on positioning the country as an
internationally leading center for quantum technology research and development.17,18 The
program is structured around three catalyst (CAT) programs: (1) quantum computing and
simulation, (2) a national quantum network, and (3) quantum sensing applications.

These catalyst programs aim to provide the resources for members to accelerate
introduction of quantum to the market via easier access to quantum networks,
computers, and simulators—and in doing so, the Netherlands intends to lower barriers
to development and testing. Within each catalyst, Quantum Delta NL created four
action lines centered around the following themes: research and innovation, quantum
ecosystem, human capital, and societal impact.

Funded research initiatives fall within one or more of the six research lines as described
in the National Agenda for Quantum Technology19: Quantum computing, quantum
simulation, quantum communication, quantum sensing, quantum algorithms, and post-
quantum cryptography. The program has already demonstrated significant impact, with
16 projects awarded funding in 2022 and 19 in 2023. In March 2025, the National Growth
Fund advisory committee approved its updated programming.20

Despite its strong research foundation, the Netherlands faces significant challenges in
attracting private investment to support its quantum ambitions, according to findings
presented in the Invest-NL report “The role of the Netherlands in quantum technology”. 21
The 18 existing or upcoming Dutch quantum companies require between €1 billion and
€2 billion to reach profitability, with €150-300 million needed within 18 months.22 While
the government has allocated over €600 million through the National Growth Fund,
private investors have contributed only €10-15 million in startup capital, significantly less
than comparable investments in the United States. The government is actively working
to address this funding gap, with Invest-NL prepared to invest part of its €250 million
allocation for fundamental technologies in quantum companies.23 The Netherlands
has also strengthened its international position through strategic partnerships,
notably signing a joint statement with the United States in February 2023 to enhance
cooperation in quantum information science and technology.24

QUANTUM INDEX REPORT 2025 | 58

 With regard to internationalization, the Netherlands advocates balancing different
objectives. The country endorses the EU’s ambition of building up its own strategic tech
industry, which would help guard against undesired dependencies. At the same time,
the Netherlands sees ‘open markets’ as the appropriate departure point and is willing to
promote mutual trust between innovative clusters worldwide.25

In 2024, the Netherlands expanded the list of items subject to export control by
including quantum computers under the category “Computers: Systems, equipment and
components”. 26

5.6 | China
China has emerged as an ambitious possible global leader in quantum technology, with
its strategy characterized by significant state investment and comprehensive national
planning. It was announced (and frequently disputed) that the government has allocated
an estimated $15 billion to quantum research and development, accounting for over 50%
of global public investment in the field.27 This investment has enabled China to achieve
several notable milestones, including the launch of the world's first quantum satellite,
Micius, in 2016,28 and the development of the world's largest quantum communication
network spanning 12,000 kilometers.29 The strategy emphasizes both quantum
computing and quantum communication, with particular success in the latter area, where
China leads the world in patents and implementation.

China's quantum strategy is distinct from Western approaches, with a strong emphasis
on state-led development and technological sovereignty.30 The Ministry of Industry and
Information Technology (MIIT) has identified quantum computing as a "future industry"
within its broader industrial policy, focusing on fault-tolerant quantum computing
technology and quantum software development.31 The government has invested in an
extensive quantum research facility in Hefei, Anhui Province, covering an area of 37
hectares, aiming for it to be an internationally leading research hub.

The country has implemented a systematic approach to drive and shape standards
development.32 In 2025, China launched its own initiative to develop quantum-resistant
encryption standards,33 paralleling the push by the US to create such standards in its
effort organized by the US National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST).34

While private investment in Chinese quantum companies appears to be limited when

compared to the US, the state-led approach has enabled a rapid buildup of capabilities.35
China's strategy also includes significant investment in quantum education and
workforce development, with initiatives like the "Education Modernisation 2035 Plan" to
prepare future generations for quantum technology development.36

59 | MIT INITIATIVE ON THE DIGITAL ECONOMY

5.7 | Ireland
Ireland launched its national quantum strategy in 2023, "Quantum 2030: A National
Quantum Technologies Strategy for Ireland," which aims to establish the country as an
internationally competitive hub for quantum technology by 2030.37 The strategy recog-
nizes Ireland's unique position as a global technology hub, with nine of the top ten global
software companies and three of the top four internet companies maintaining significant
operations in the country. While Ireland currently trails similarly sized European states in
quantum technologies, the strategy outlines an ambitious plan to capitalize on the coun-
try's existing technology ecosystem and develop indigenous quantum capabilities.

The five pillar approach focuses on supporting excellent fundamental and applied
quantum research, fostering top science and engineering talent, prioritizing national
and international collaboration, stimulating innovation, entrepreneurship and economic
competitiveness, and building awareness of quantum technologies and real-world benefits.

The strategy focuses on developing Ireland's quantum research capabilities and building a
strong quantum workforce. The initiative emphasizes increasing training through research
for scientists, engineers, mathematicians, and electrical engineers, with particular atten-
tion to developing “quantum engineers”. The government is actively encouraging major
technology companies with existing Irish operations to establish quantum technology
research labs and recruit early stage Irish scientists. One early success is the hosting of
IBM’s sole European Research Lab38 with a focus on quantum in Dublin.

While Ireland faces challenges in competing with countries like the Netherlands,
Denmark, and Finland, the strategy represents a significant step toward establishing
Ireland as a competitive player in the global quantum technology landscape. The strategy
also sets out to build and maintain collaboration with international partners. For instance,
Ireland intends to strengthen quantum-technologies research links with the EU, US, and
UK. This could be supported by developing new funding mechanisms, as well as drawing
on established sources of funding.

QUANTUM INDEX REPORT 2025 | 60

 5.8 | Overview

United States Australia Canada United Kingdom

Main National Quantum National Quantum National Quantum National Quantum

Initiative Initiative Act Strategy Strategy Strategy

Date December 2018 May 2023 January 2023 March 2023

$2.7 billion over 5

£2.5 billion over 10
Funding years (proposed A$1 billion Up to C$360 million
years
reauthorization)

Research, com-
Quantum Quantum science,
Quantum mercialization,
computers and engineering,
computing, infrastructure,
Focus Areas software, quantum business support,
sensing, workforce, ethics,
communications, regulatory
communications international part-
quantum sensors framework
nerships

Aim to be world's New skills

Workforce Quantum education Talent development
top destination for initiatives, doctoral
Development and workforce hub as a key pillar
quantum talent training, fellowships

Aim to be quantum-
Shift from basic enabled economy
Attention to
research to Missions-based by 2033 via support
Key Feature responsible
applications in approach for business
innovation
reauthorization and standards
development

61 | MIT INITIATIVE ON THE DIGITAL ECONOMY

 Netherlands China Ireland

National Strategy for

Main National Agenda on
Quantum Science and Quantum 2030
Initiative Quantum Technology
Technology

Ongoing since 13th

Date September 2019 five-year plan (2016- November 2023
2020)

Full budget unknown

€615 million (Quantum
Funding $15 billion (estimated) (IrelandQCI project:
Delta NL program)
€10 million)

Quantum computing,
Commercialization,
Quantum communications,
education, ethical
Focus Areas communications, sensing, international
development,
computing, sensing collaboration,
community building
ecosystem building

Develop quantum
Workforce Focus on training new Centralized talent skills base, support
Development talents development at USTC researchers, SMEs,
and innovators

Quantum Delta Emphasis on

Centralized,
NL program coordination, talent
state-controlled
Key Feature implementation with development, and
approach with rapid
focus on ecosystem leveraging EU/UK/US
development focus
building partnerships

QUANTUM INDEX REPORT 2025 | 62

 5.9 | Future research
Building on this analysis of national quantum policies from select countries, our aim for
future reports is to incorporate additional nations. We also intend to add more detailed
comparative analysis with more precise assessments of different governance approaches
in the coming years. The tracking framework established in this chapter would provide
valuable longitudinal insights into policy evolution and effectiveness over time, allowing
researchers to identify successful regulatory adaptations and best practices in balancing
innovation with governance objectives. Please reach out to share additional data or
insights that might contribute to this work. Our QIR website provides further up-to-date
documentation of evolving policies, serving as a dynamic complement to this chapter.

You can reach us at [email protected].

 Footnotes
1 These states are parties to Wassenaar Arrangement on Export Controls for Conventional Arms and Dual-Use Goods and
Technologies, however this particular export control implementation effort took place outside of the official Wassenaar Arrangement.
This could potentially mean that export control limitations might apply to countries party to the Arrangement if they do not implement
similar controls or until the Arrangement ends up covering quantum technologies.

2 ‘Quantum Technologies Flagship | Shaping Europe’s Digital Future’ <https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/policies/quantum-

technologies-flagship> accessed 3 April 2025.

3 115th Congress, ‘H.R.6227 - National Quantum Initiative Act’ (21 December 2018) <https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/
house-bill/6227/text> accessed 3 April 2025.

4 The White House, ‘National Security Memorandum on Promoting United States Leadership in Quantum Computing While Mitigating
Risks to Vulnerable Cryptographic Systems’ (The White House, 4 May 2022) <https://bidenwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefing-room/
statements-releases/2022/05/04/national-security-memorandum-on-promoting-united-states-leadership-in-quantum-computing-
while-mitigating-risks-to-vulnerable-cryptographic-systems/> accessed 20 March 2025.

5 National Science and Technology Council, ‘Advancing International Cooperation In Quantum Information Science And Technology’ (2024).

6 ibid.

7 National Quantum Coordination Office, ‘Department of Commerce Releases Export Controls on Quantum Technologies’ (National
Quantum Initiative, 6 September 2024) <https://www.quantum.gov/department-of-commerce-releases-export-controls-on-quantum-
technologies/> accessed 3 April 2025.

8 Department of Industry Science and Resources, ‘National Quantum Strategy’ (2023) <https://www.industry.gov.au/publications/
national-quantum-strategy> accessed 3 April 2025.

9 Australian Government, ‘Defence and Strategic Goods List 2024’ <https://www.legislation.gov.au/F2024L01024/asmade> accessed
3 April 2025.

10 Government of Canada, ‘Canada’s National Quantum Strategy’ (Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada 2023)
<https://ised-isde.canada.ca/site/national-quantum-strategy/en/national-quantum-strategy-roadmap-quantum-computing>
accessed 3 April 2025.

11 Global Affairs Canada, ‘Notice to Exporters No. 1129 – Amendment to the Export Control List: Quantum Computing and Advanced
Semiconductors’ (GAC, 19 June 2024) <https://www.international.gc.ca/trade-commerce/controls-controles/notices-avis/1129.
aspx?lang=eng> accessed 3 April 2025.

12 UK Department for Science, Innovation and Technology, ‘National Quantum Strategy’ (GOV.UK, March 2023) <https://www.gov.uk/
government/publications/national-quantum-strategy> accessed 3 April 2025.

13 UK Department for Science, Innovation and Technology, ‘National Quantum Strategy Additional Evidence’ (GOV.UK, December
2023) <https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/national-quantum-strategy> accessed 3 April 2025.

63 | MIT INITIATIVE ON THE DIGITAL ECONOMY

14 ‘National Quantum Strategy Missions’ (GOV.UK) <https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/national-quantum-strategy/
national-quantum-strategy-missions> accessed 3 April 2025.

15 ‘UK National Quantum Technologies Program’ <https://uknqt.ukri.org/> accessed 3 April 2025.

16 ‘The Export Control (Amendment) Regulations 2024’ <https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2024/346/regulation/2/made>

accessed 3 April 2025.

17 https://quantumdelta.nl/

18 ‘Launching Quantum Delta NL: Dutch Players Join Forces to Build the Future of Quantum Technology’ <https://thequantuminsider.
com/2021/01/28/launching-quantum-delta-nl-dutch-players-join-forces-to-build-the-future-of-quantum-technology/> accessed 3
April 2025.

19 Quantum Delta NL, ‘National Agenda for Quantum Technology’ (2019).

20 ‘Quantum Delta NL Expands Strategy with Renewed National Growth Fund Support’ (Quantum Delta NL) <https://quantumdelta.
nl/news/quantum-delta-nl-expands-strategy-with-renewed-national-growth-fund-support> accessed 3 April 2025.

21 ‘De Rol van Nederland in Quantum Technologie’ (Invest-NL, 31 October 2023) <https://www.invest-nl.nl/page/2868/de-rol-van-
nederland-in-quantum-technologie> accessed 3 April 2025.

22 Matt Swayne, ‘The Netherlands Is Putting A Call Out For Quantum Investors’ (The Quantum Insider, 31 October 2023) <https://
thequantuminsider.com/2023/10/31/the-netherlands-is-putting-call-out-for-quantum-investors/> accessed 3 April 2025.

23 ibid.

24 National Quantum Initiative, ‘The United States and the Netherlands Sign Joint Statement to Enhance Cooperation on Quantum’ (15
February 2023) <https://www.quantum.gov/the-united-states-and-the-netherlands-sign-joint-statement-to-enhance-cooperation-
on-quantum/> accessed 3 April 2025.

25 ‘International Collaboration’ (Quantum Delta NL) <https://quantumdelta.nl/international-collaboration> accessed 3 April 2025.

26 Ministerie van Buitenlandse Zaken, ‘Regeling van de Minister voor Buitenlandse Handel en Ontwikkelingshulp van 11 oktober 2024,
nr. BZ2405833 houdende invoering van een vergunningplicht voor de uitvoer van producten die niet zijn genoemd in bijlage I van
Verordening 2021/821 (Regeling aanvullende controlemaatregelen op de Verordening producten voor tweeërlei gebruik)’ (18 October
2024) <https://zoek.officielebekendmakingen.nl/stcrt-2024-33838.html#d17e1359> accessed 3 April 2025.

27 Hodan Omaar Makaryan Martin, ‘How Innovative Is China in Quantum?’ (2024) <https://itif.org/publications/2024/09/09/how-
innovative-is-china-in-quantum/> accessed 3 April 2025.

28 Karen Kwon, ‘China Reaches New Milestone in Space-Based Quantum Communications’ (Scientific American) <https://www.
scientificamerican.com/article/china-reaches-new-milestone-in-space-based-quantum-communications/> accessed 3 April 2025.

29 ‘China’s Long View on Quantum Tech Has the US and EU Playing Catch-up | Merics’ (14 December 2024) <https://merics.org/en/
report/chinas-long-view-quantum-tech-has-us-and-eu-playing-catch> accessed 3 April 2025.

30 Marc Julienne, ‘China’s Quest for a Quantum Leap’ [2024] Reconnect China Policy Brief 15.

31 Ministry of Industry and Information Technology (2024) No. 12, ‘Implementation Opinions of Seven Ministries Including the Ministry
of Industry and Information Technology on Promoting the Innovative Development of Future Industries’ <https://cset.georgetown.
edu/wp-content/uploads/t0582_future_industries_EN.pdf>.

32 ‘China Raising the Ante on Standards Setting’ (QED-C, 6 July 2022) <https://quantumconsortium.org/blog/china-raising-the-ante-
on-standards-setting/> accessed 3 April 2025.

33 Matthew Sparkes, ‘China Launches Hunt for Ways to Protect Data from Quantum Computers’ (New Scientist, February 2025)
<https://www.newscientist.com/article/2467574-china-launches-hunt-for-ways-to-protect-data-from-quantum-computers/>
accessed 3 April 2025.

34 'NIST Releases First 3 Finalized Post-Quantum Encryption Standards’ [2024] NIST <https://www.nist.gov/news-events/
news/2024/08/nist-releases-first-3-finalized-post-quantum-encryption-standards> accessed 3 April 2025.

35 ‘China’s Long View on Quantum Tech Has the US and EU Playing Catch-up | Merics’ (n 29).

36 Jakob P, ‘Chinese Quantum Companies and National Strategy 2023’ (The Quantum Insider, 13 April 2023) <https://
thequantuminsider.com/2023/04/13/chinese-quantum-companies-and-national-strategy-2023/> accessed 3 April 2025.

37 Government of Ireland, ‘Quantum 2030 A National Quantum Technologies Strategy for Ireland’ (2023).

38 Blathnaid O’Dea, ‘IBM to Invest €10m in Skills Development for Its Irish Workforce’ (Silicon Republic, 18 May 2023) <https://www.
siliconrepublic.com/careers/ibm-ireland-skills-investment> accessed 3 April 2025.
QUANTUM INDEX REPORT 2025 | 64
 6 | Workforce
The quantum technology sector faces a critical challenge in developing and maintaining
a qualified workforce to support its continued advancement. Occupations often require
a combination of theoretical knowledge and practical expertise, making it challenging for
employers to find candidates with the right mix of skills and acumen.

Major nations understand that establishing and nurturing a critical mass of quantum
talent is a priority and have responded by developing comprehensive strategies to
address these needs. The United States has established the National Quantum Initiative1
(NQI), which includes dedicated funding for quantum workforce development and
coordinates efforts across academia, industry, and government sectors. Investment in
NQI Act-authorized activities alone exceeded $2.5 billion from 2019 to 2024.2

In addition to the NQI, the CHIPS and Science Act3 included specific provisions for
better evaluating quantum workforce needs and initiatives to drive quantum curriculum
development and leadership.

Similarly, many other countries such as Canada4 and Australia5 have launched
national quantum strategies specifically emphasizing workforce expansion and talent
development. These initiatives recognize that developing quantum expertise should not
only focus on technical training, but that it also requires creating an entire ecosystem of
quantum-savvy professionals who can bridge the gap between research and practice.

The “quantum-as-a-service model” is

enabling wider access to quantum computing
resources which supports relatively low
cost experimentation and drives skills
development in the area.

65 | MIT INITIATIVE ON THE DIGITAL ECONOMY

In 2025, the European Commission announced the Digital Europe work program for
2025-2027, which includes the establishment of a Quantum Digital Skills Academy with
the aim of closing the talent gap and strengthening the pool of specialists. The indicative
budget for the academy was announced as €10 million.6

In recent years the United States has created more quantum job openings than can
be filled7, with the variety of roles related to quantum expanding in academia, industry,
national labs, and government. The opportunities range8 from highly specialized jobs
(e.g. error correction scientist or quantum algorithm developer) to occupations requiring
a range of skills, most of which are not quantum related (e.g. business development for
quantum computing firms).

The educational infrastructure supporting this growth includes the establishment of

quantum hubs at universities and research institutes, specialized training programs
connecting business managers with leading quantum researchers, and integration of
quantum education into existing academic frameworks. The “quantum-as-a-service
model” is enabling wider access to quantum computing resources that supports
relatively low-cost experimentation and drives skills development in the area.

QUANTUM INDEX REPORT 2025 | 66

 6.1 | Quantum skills in job postings

The US labor market has shown relatively steady growth in

demand for quantum skills since 2018.

US job postings requiring “quantum” skills as share of total job postings, 2011 to mid-2024

Based on the Lightcast data on US job postings requiring “quantum” skills as a share of
total job postings from 2011 to mid-2024, the share of quantum skills in job postings has
grown almost three times.

The data shows three distinct phases in the evolution of quantum skills demand. The
initial period from 2010 to 2017 was characterized by limited growth. This was followed
by an acceleration beginning in 2018, when the share almost doubled over a two-year
period. Since 2021, the growth has stabilized into a more moderate but consistent
upward trend, with occasional fluctuations becoming more pronounced.

Seasonal patterns seem to emerge as a significant feature of the data, with consistent
quarterly variations. The highest shares of quantum skills in job postings occur during
the second and third quarters of each year, while the first and fourth quarters typically
show lower shares. This seasonal amplitude suggests a regular cyclical pattern in hiring
demand.

The peak growth rate occurred in 2020, and while rates have since moderated, the data
shows consistent upward movement, indicating sustained growth in quantum skills
demand. The overall trend demonstrates the increasing importance of quantum skills in
the labor market.

67 | MIT INITIATIVE ON THE DIGITAL ECONOMY

6.2 | Quantum skills in job postings

US job postings with mentions of "quantum" began to rise

rapidly in 2018 before peaking in 2019. There is no evidence
of sustained growth in quantum demand versus the overall
labor market (which was very robust in 2021-2024).

US job postings with mentions of “quantum” as share of total job postings, 2011 to mid-2024

The Lightcast dataset of US job postings mentioning “quantum” spans from 2011 to
mid-2024, encompassing monthly observations. The temporal pattern revealed three
distinct phases in quantum workforce demand. Initially, from 2011 to 2017, the market
showed remarkable stability. This early period demonstrated minimal volatility. However,
beginning in 2018, the landscape underwent strong transformation, marked by increased
growth that continued through 2019. During this period, quantum job postings reached
their peak share in July 2019, representing a significant increase from the early period
baseline.

More recently, from 2020 onward, the market has entered a phase of stabilization and
moderate adjustment. While experiencing some decline from the 2019 peak, quantum-
related job postings have maintained levels significantly higher than the pre-2018 era.
Current figures have stabilized in the early months of 2024.

These monthly patterns suggest that quantum-related hiring typically peaks during
summer months and follows a quarterly cycle with highest activity in Q3. However, it's
important to note that while these trends exist, they are relatively modest compared to
the overall growth trend in quantum job postings over time.

QUANTUM INDEX REPORT 2025 | 68

 Throughout the entire period, despite fluctuations, the overall trajectory indicates
sustained growth in quantum workforce demand—suggesting continued expansion in
the field's employment opportunities.

US job postings share mentioning “quantum” by year, 2011-2023

6.3 | Future research

We aim to continue to track this data to generate insights into the ongoing trends with
the aim of better informing the community on important workforce developments.
The Lightcast data we gathered suggested the quantum skills library could benefit
from ongoing updates as this is a dynamic field where new job descriptions and
technical requirements are continuously added. Please reach out if you are interested in
collaborating on skills libraries, new resources to monitor, or the creation of additional
datasets internationally.

You can reach us at [email protected].

69 | MIT INITIATIVE ON THE DIGITAL ECONOMY

 Footnotes
1 115th Congress, ‘H.R.6227 - National Quantum Initiative Act’ (21 December 2018) <https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/
house-bill/6227/text> accessed 3 April 2025.

2 National Science and Technology Council, ‘National Quantum Initiative Supplement To The President’s Fy 2025 Budget’.

3 117th Congress, ‘H.R.4346 - 117th Congress (2021-2022): CHIPS and Science Act’ (9 August 2022) <https://www.congress.gov/
bill/117th-congress/house-bill/4346> accessed 14 November 2024.

4 Government of Canada, ‘Canada’s National Quantum Strategy’ (Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada 2025)
<https://ised-isde.canada.ca/site/national-quantum-strategy/en/national-quantum-strategy-roadmap-quantum-computing>
accessed 3 April 2025.

5 Department of Industry Science and Resources, ‘National Quantum Strategy’ (2023) Strategy or plan <https://www.industry.gov.au/
publications/national-quantum-strategy> accessed 3 April 2025.

6 ‘Commission to Invest €1.3 Billion in Artificial Intelligence, Cybersecurity and Digital Skills | Shaping Europe’s Digital Future’
<https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/news/commission-invest-eu13-billion-artificial-intelligence-cybersecurity-and-digital-
skills> accessed 3 April 2025.

7 National Science and Technology Council, ‘Quantum Information Science And Technology Workforce Development National
Strategic Plan’ (2022).

8 Ciaran Hughes and others, ‘Assessing the Needs of the Quantum Industry’ (arXiv, 25 August 2021) <http://arxiv.org/abs/2109.03601>
accessed 3 April 2025.

QUANTUM INDEX REPORT 2025 | 70

 7 | Education

The creation of a mature quantum ecosystem depends not only on scientific

breakthroughs and unlocking commercial use cases but also on the cultivation of a
multidisciplinary workforce equipped to build, navigate, and govern this emergent space.
However, the inherently complex nature of quantum phenomena and the reliance on
advanced mathematics and physics concepts can pose a perceived barrier to education
and training. Despite this there are an increasing range of global initiatives focused on
providing training at all levels, from K-12, to postgraduate and professional development.

In the US, the National Q-12 Education Partnership1 was launched in 2020 as part of the
national quantum strategy and aims to increase the capabilities and number of students
who are ready to engage in the quantum workforce by developing K-12 level educational
materials and providing classroom tools for hands-on experiences.

There are similar examples of quantum education programs targeted at this level in
China2, and in the EU, through its Quantum Flagship’s dedicated initiative to implement
quantum topics in high school curricula.3 Industry also showed an interest in filling the
formal curricula lag in quantum for high school students. The Coding School, a non-
profit, launched an introductory course in quantum technologies targeted at high school
students in collaboration with IBM, MIT, and UC Berkeley in 2020.4 The Coding School
reports that their Introduction to Quantum Computing course was attended by over
18,000 high school students so far, and it continues to be offered in collaboration with
Google Quantum AI for its September 2025 iteration.5

Many universities internationally offer specialized degrees in quantum technologies, at

both undergraduate and graduate levels. These programs often involve interdisciplinary
approaches, combining physics, computer science, and engineering to prepare students
for careers in quantum research and development.

In this chapter, we present global data on master’s degree programs dedicated to

quantum technologies. Given the very limited number of offerings of bachelor’s degree
programs dedicated to quantum technologies, we present enrollment data for bachelor’s
degrees in the physics, computer science, and engineering fields within the US.

71 | MIT INITIATIVE ON THE DIGITAL ECONOMY

7.1 | Postgraduate education
As the quantum technology industry continues to grow, there may be increasing demand
for specialized master’s degrees tailored to different sectors. Some institutions have
already begun to offer dedicated streams within their programs. This trend towards more
specialized training reflects the growing diversity of roles in the quantum sector and the
need for education to keep pace with industry demands.

Germany is the leading nation in terms of master’s degrees

in quantum technologies, with 12 programs on offer. The UK
follows closely with 10 programs, whereas the United States
offers 9. France and the Netherlands are also in the top 5
countries offering master’s degrees specifically referring
to “quantum” in the degree title.

This distribution suggests that quantum technology is becoming increasingly important

globally, with major research hubs like Germany, the United Kingdom, and the United
States leading the way. The number of programs also reflects the interdisciplinary nature
of quantum technology, which often involves physics, engineering, computer science,
and mathematics. This diversity of possible departmental homes within universities is
likely contributing to the growth of these programs. As expectations for commercial
application breakthroughs in quantum computing continue to rise, we expect to see
further expansion in the number of master’s programs dedicated to this field globally.

Master degrees with a specific reference to 'quantum' in the degree name

QUANTUM INDEX REPORT 2025 | 72

 Based on Studyportals data, there are 69 master's degrees distributed across 19
countries with a specific reference to “quantum” in the degree name. Germany stands
out as the leader, offering 12 quantum-related master's programs, which accounts for
17.4% of the global total. The United Kingdom follows closely behind with 10 programs
(14.5%), while the United States offers 9 programs (13.0%). France and the Netherlands
each contribute 6 programs (8.7% each), completing the top five countries.

The distribution pattern reveals strong concentration in European countries and the
United States, with Germany, the UK, and the US together accounting for 45% of all
quantum master's programs. There is a notable gap between the leading group and the
majority of countries, with most offering just a single program. In this list, the Asia-Pacific
region shows relatively limited representation: only Japan, Malaysia, and Australia offer
programs, each contributing a single quantum-related master's degree to the total count.

The QED-C State of the Global Quantum Industry Report6 presented a word cloud of
their quantum postgraduate degrees database. The word cloud representing the data
used in our report resulted in the following:

73 | MIT INITIATIVE ON THE DIGITAL ECONOMY

7.2 | Enrollment numbers
The 2021 US Report7 “The Role of International Talent in Quantum Information Science”
focuses on the future workforce needs of Quantum Information Science and Technology
(QIST). The report concludes that the quantum science and technology sector faces
a critical talent shortage across all major sectors, including industry, academia, and
government. While the National Quantum Initiative aims to develop new workforce
talent, there's an immediate need for skilled professionals and uncertainty remains about
whether existing programs will sufficiently meet future demands. According to the report,
international talent plays a crucial role, with foreign students comprising approximately
half of US graduates in quantum-related fields.

The United States has historically benefited from retaining these international scholars,
with about 70% of foreign STEM PhD graduates choosing to stay in the country as of
2017. However, developing new quantum expertise is a lengthy process requiring roughly
a decade of post-secondary education and training. To address the growing workforce
demands, the United States will need to pursue a dual strategy: expanding its domestic
talent pipeline while maintaining its ability to attract and retain international expertise.

The report states that “the most QIST-relevant degree fields are physics, electrical
engineering, and computer science” and explains that these domains were selected
based on two criteria: preliminary search of keywords for online job postings and
analysis of doctoral thesis titles, abstracts, and keywords.

To better understand emerging enrollment trends for physics, electrical engineering, and
computer science courses, we analyzed data from the NSC Research Center (January
2025 update).

Undergraduate degree enrollments in the US, 2019-2024

QUANTUM INDEX REPORT 2025 | 74

 Based on the enrollment data from 2019 to 2024, computer science exhibits the highest
student numbers and substantial growth over the period. The electrical, electronics, and
communications engineering program maintains moderate enrollment levels, whereas
physics enrollments show the smallest but most consistent enrollment pattern, with a
narrower range of 4,811 students between its lowest and highest enrollment figures.

The data categorization involved challenges as the major field groups at times had
interconnected degrees such as “Computer and Information Science, general” and
“Astronomy and Astrophysics,” which are not included in the subject-level enrollment
data. In order to provide a fuller picture, the report also presents the enrollment numbers
for the three major field families engineering, physical sciences, and computer and
information sciences and support services.

Undergraduate major field family enrollments in the US, 2019-2024

75 | MIT INITIATIVE ON THE DIGITAL ECONOMY

7.3 | Future research
The quantum education landscape is rapidly evolving, but it remains fragmented and
under-documented. While anecdotal evidence points to rising interest and enrollment
in quantum-related programs, there is a critical need for data on student demographics,
institutional investment levels, and career outcomes. Such data is essential for identifying
best practices, highlighting gaps in access and equity, and supporting evidence-based
policymaking.

We invite contributions from the quantum education community to future editions of this
report. The objective is to deepen and expand the insights provided.

Researchers and educators interested in sharing enrollment data, curriculum insights,

or information about new programs are encouraged to contact us. We hope that our
community-led approach will facilitate a comprehensive global overview of quantum
education initiatives and facilitate the development of more effective educational
strategies for the field.

You can reach us at [email protected].

 Footnotes
1 National Quantum Initiative, ‘Enabling People’ (National Quantum Initiative) <https://www.quantum.gov/workforce/> accessed 24
March 2025.

2 SpinQ Press Release, ‘Shenzhen Middle School: Building a Quantum Computing Elective Program from the Ground Up’ (28 June
2024) <https://www.spinquanta.com/news-detail/shenzhen-middle-school-building-a-quantum-computing-elective-program-
from20250121075716> accessed 24 March 2025.

3 ‘QTEdu- Coordination and Support Action for Quantum Technology Education’ (Quantum Flagship) <https://qt.eu/projects/archive/
csa-projects/qtedu> accessed 24 March 2025.

4 ‘IBM and Qubit by Qubit Offer Quantum Course | IBM Quantum Computing Blog’ <https://www.ibm.com/quantum/blog/year-
three-quantum-coding-school> accessed 28 March 2025.

5 ‘QubitxQubit | Course Info’ <https://www.qubitbyqubit.org/course-info> accessed 28 March 2025.

6 QED-C, ‘State of the Global Quantum Industry Report’ (2025) <https://quantumconsortium.org/stateofthequantumindustry2025/>

accessed 24 March 2025.

7 Subcommittee on Economic and Security Implications of Quantum Science Committee on Homeland and National Security of the
National Science & Technology Council, ‘The Role of International Talent in Quantum Information Science’.

QUANTUM INDEX REPORT 2025 | 76

 8 | Public Opinion
To better understand public perceptions and understanding of quantum technologies,
we conducted a survey of US residents in October 2024. The survey instrument was
administered to a representative panel of 1,375 US residents, with demographic sampling
aligned to the US Census Bureau distributions for both gender and age groups, ensuring
population representativeness. The survey was aimed at capturing attitudes, awareness
levels, and expectations surrounding this emerging field. As quantum technologies
transition from research laboratories to practical applications, public engagement and
trust will play a critical role in shaping adoption and policy.

77 | MIT INITIATIVE ON THE DIGITAL ECONOMY

8.1 | Quantum computing

8.1.1. Familiarity

When asked about the familiarity levels on quantum computing, from the 1,375 survey
respondents, 25% responded they were “not at all familiar,” 15% said “not so familiar,”
26% indicated they were “somewhat familiar,” 18% claimed to be “very familiar,” and 16%
reported being “extremely familiar.”

How familiar are you with quantum computing?

The survey reveals a diverse distribution of familiarity with quantum computing. The
largest segment consists of those who are “somewhat familiar” with the topic, represent-
ing 26% of respondents. Interestingly, this moderate level of awareness is bordered by
another substantial group: those with advanced familiarity represented with 34%.

QUANTUM INDEX REPORT 2025 | 78

 Our survey data indicates that quantum computing awareness
tends to cluster at either end of the spectrum; either
people have had minimal exposure or have invested
significant time in understanding the technology.

Breaking down the responses further reveals that among those with limited familiarity,
there's a notable distinction between those who are “not at all familiar” (25%) and those
who are “not so familiar” (15%), suggesting that complete unfamiliarity is more common
than partial unfamiliarity. Conversely, among those with higher levels of familiarity,
there's a relatively even split between “very familiar” (18%) and “extremely familiar” (16%)
respondents. This bimodal distribution indicates that quantum computing awareness
tends to cluster at either end of the spectrum—people either have minimal exposure or
have invested significant time in understanding the subject.

These findings might indicate an alignment with broader technological adoption

patterns, particularly in emerging technologies. The presence of a large “somewhat
familiar” group (26%) represents a crucial middle ground, potentially indicating
recent exposure to quantum computing through media coverage or educational
initiatives. This distribution suggests that quantum computing is entering mainstream
discourse while indicating the importance of ongoing opportunities for education and
awareness-building.1

79 | MIT INITIATIVE ON THE DIGITAL ECONOMY

 8.1.2. Emotional repsonses

Among the 1,375 survey respondents, the emotional responses varied considerably
across different potential quantum computing applications. When asked to report on to
what extent they feel nervous or excited regarding potential uses of quantum computing,
for materials and pharmaceuticals development, 7% felt very nervous, 11% somewhat
nervous, 29% neutral, 27% somewhat excited, and 26% very excited. Regarding
optimization, 7% expressed very nervous feelings, 11% somewhat nervous, 31% neutral,
24% somewhat excited, and 27% very excited. For data security and cryptography,
responses showed 11% very nervous, 13% somewhat nervous, 30% neutral, 20%
somewhat excited, and 26% very excited.

Quantum computing can be potentially used for different areas. To what extent do
you feel nervous or excited regarding the potential uses listed below?

Discovery of new materials Optimization Data security and

(new materials and pharmaceuticals) (improving the efficiency) cryptography

The survey reveals the patterns in how the general public perceive different applications
of quantum computing, with clear distinctions in emotional responses across various
domains. Overall, across all applications, approximately half of respondents express ex-
citement, while about one-fifth report feeling nervous, and nearly a third remain neutral.

These responses suggest a generally positive outlook toward

quantum computing's potential applications, though with
notable variations depending on the specific use case.

QUANTUM INDEX REPORT 2025 | 80

 Graph below compares and contrasts the number of positive and negative answers
(neutral answers are not represented in this graph)

Discovery of new materials and pharmaceuticals

Optimization

Data security and cryptography

The application of quantum computing to materials and pharmaceutical discovery

elicits the most enthusiastic response, with 53% of respondents expressing excitement
and only 18% feeling nervous. This high level of enthusiasm aligns with the potential
transformative impact of quantum computing in drug discovery and materials science,
where breakthroughs could lead to improvements in human health and societal
advancement.

In contrast, optimization applications show slightly lower overall excitement (51%) and
similar levels of responses expressing nervousness (18%), suggesting broad acceptance
of quantum computing's role in improving complex systems.

Data security and cryptography stands out as the most controversial application,
generating significantly higher anxiety levels (24% nervous) while maintaining
substantial excitement (46%). This heightened concern might reflect public awareness

81 | MIT INITIATIVE ON THE DIGITAL ECONOMY

of the dual nature of quantum computing in cryptography, such as its potential to break
current encryption methods while simultaneously enabling new, quantum-resistant
cryptographic solutions. The emotional responses around this application might suggest
that the respondents recognize both the risks and opportunities quantum computing
presents to digital security.

Across all three potential applications, approximately 30% of respondents maintain

neutral positions, indicating either uncertainty about the implications or a wait-and-see
attitude toward these emerging technologies. This consistent neutrality rate suggests
widespread recognition that quantum computing represents a complex technology
whose ultimate societal impact remains uncertain for the general public. The relatively
stable neutral percentage across different applications contrasts with the varying levels
of excitement and nervousness, suggesting that while people form distinct opinions
about specific applications, many remain cautious about making definitive judgments.

Comparative analysis reveals that while excitement levels remain consistently high
across all applications (ranging from 46% to 53%), nervousness varies from 18% to
24%. This pattern might suggest that while Americans generally welcome quantum
computing's potential benefits, their comfort levels vary significantly depending on the
specific domain of application.

Public acceptance of quantum computing may depend heavily

on how its applications are framed and communicated, with
practical applications like materials discovery receiving
more universal enthusiasm compared to security-related
applications that raise broader societal concerns.

QUANTUM INDEX REPORT 2025 | 82

 8.2 | Quantum networking

8.2.1. Familiarity
When asked about the familiarity levels on quantum networking, from the 1,375 survey
respondents, 28% reported being “not at all familiar” with quantum networking, 18% said
they were “not so familiar,” 20% indicated they were “somewhat familiar,” 18% claimed to
be “very familiar,” and 16% reported being “extremely familiar” with the technology.

How familiar are you with quantum networking?

Nearly half (46%) of respondents reported basic or no familiarity with quantum

networking. This level of basic familiarity is particularly notable, as it represents the
largest single segment of responses. The distribution shows a clear progression, with
20% reporting “somewhat familiar,” 18% “very familiar,” and 16% “extremely familiar,”
resulting in a combined 34% advanced familiarity.

The relatively balanced distribution between basic and advanced familiarity levels
suggests that quantum networking awareness is developing in a structured way. While
the largest segment remains those with minimal familiarity, the substantial proportion
of advanced familiarity (34%) might be an indication of stronger engagement from
technical communities and the quantum-curious.

83 | MIT INITIATIVE ON THE DIGITAL ECONOMY

 When asked about quantum computing, 25% of the respondents
reported being "not at all familiar" and 15% indicated they
were "not so familiar." In contrast, quantum networking
showed higher rates of unfamiliarity, with 28% reporting
"not at all familiar" and 18% stating they were "not so
familiar." This pattern indicates quantum networking faces
greater challenges in basic public awareness than quantum
computing.

8.2.2. Emotional responses

Among the 1,375 survey respondents, the emotional responses varied across different
potential uses of quantum networking. When asked to report on to what extent they feel
nervous or excited regarding potential uses of quantum networking for its relevance to
secure communication: 7% of the respondents reported very nervous, 11% somewhat
nervous, 29% neither nervous nor excited, 25% somewhat excited, and 28% very excited.
For its relevance to scale up quantum computing by networking: 8% of the respondents
reported very nervous, 12% somewhat nervous, 36% neither nervous nor excited, 20%
somewhat excited, and 24% very excited.

Quantum networking can be potentially used for different areas. To what extent do
you feel nervous or excited regarding the potential uses listed below?

More secure communication Scaling up quantum computing

(by networking several computers)

QUANTUM INDEX REPORT 2025 | 84

 The overall sentiment analysis reveals a generally positive outlook toward both aspects
of quantum networking. For secure communication, 53% of respondents expressed
positive feelings (combining the answers stating “very excited” and “somewhat excited”),
while 18% expressed negative feelings (combining the answers stating “very nervous”
and “somewhat nervous”). For scaling quantum computing, 44% expressed positive
feelings and 20% expressed negative feelings.

Graph below compares and contrasts the number of positive and negative answers
(neutral answers are not represented in this graph)

More secure communication

Scaling up quantum computing

Comparing the two aspects reveals that although both show positive sentiment, secure
communication generates stronger enthusiasm, with 9 percentage points more positive
responses than scaling quantum computing.

Survey data suggests that many Americans are cautiously

optimistic about quantum networking, particularly regarding
its potential for secure communication. The relatively high
percentage of neutral responses indicates that many people
are still learning about and forming opinions on this aspect
of quantum technology.

85 | MIT INITIATIVE ON THE DIGITAL ECONOMY

 8.3 | Governance

We asked the same 1,375 participants to report to what extent they agree or disagree
with the following three statements: (1) the State can be trusted to exert effective control
over organizations and companies using quantum technologies, (2) US government
should fund the research and development of quantum technologies, and (3) US
companies should fund the research and development of quantum technologies.

To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements:

State can be trusted to exert effective US government should fund the US companies should fund the
control over organizations & companies research and development of quantum research and development of quantum
using quantum technologies technologies technologies

For the statement about state control over quantum technologies: 11% strongly disagree,
14% somewhat disagree, 33% neither agree nor disagree, 20% somewhat agree, and
22% strongly agree.

For government funding of quantum technologies: 7% strongly disagree, 9% somewhat

disagree, 32% neither agree nor disagree, 25% somewhat agree, and 27% strongly
agree.

For company funding of quantum technologies: 5% strongly disagree, 7% somewhat

disagree, 32% neither agree nor disagree, 27% somewhat agree, and 29% strongly
agree.

QUANTUM INDEX REPORT 2025 | 86

 Graph below compares and contrasts the number of supporting (agreeing) and opposing
(disagreeing) answers (neutral answers are not represented in this graph)

State can be trusted to exert effective control over organizations

and companies using quantum technologies

US government should fund the research and development of

quantum technologies

US companies should fund the research and development of

quantum technologies

The negative responses show variations across the statements. The state control
statement received the highest negative response rate at 25%, followed by government
funding at 16%, and company funding at 12%. This pattern suggests that Americans are
most skeptical about government control over quantum technologies, while being more
comfortable with private sector involvement.

The positive responses reveal particularly high levels of enthusiasm for company funding
with 56% positive responses and government funding with 52% positive responses. The
state control statement received significantly lower positive responses at 42%.

The findings suggest that Americans generally support the

development of quantum technologies but have nuanced views
about how this development should be managed. While there
is strong support for both government and private sector
investment, there is more skepticism about state control
over quantum technologies.

87 | MIT INITIATIVE ON THE DIGITAL ECONOMY

The high percentage of neutral responses across all statements (around one third) might
also indicate that many Americans are still forming their opinions about the governance
of quantum technologies, highlighting the need for more public education and dialogue
about these issues.

8.4 | Future research

Repeating the survey in future years will enable us to track shifts in public awareness,
sentiment, and understanding of quantum technologies over time. Longitudinal
data will help identify emerging concerns, misconceptions, or areas where targeted
communication and education may be needed. It will also offer valuable insights into
societal readiness and trust. We invite readers of this report—whether from the public,
academia, industry, or policy communities—to share their perspectives and suggest
questions or themes you believe should be included in future surveys. Your input will help
ensure this effort remains relevant, inclusive, and responsive to the broader community.

You can reach us at [email protected].

 Footnotes
1 ‘U.S. Quantum Leadership May Hinge on Public Perceptions’ (Brookings) <https://www.brookings.edu/articles/u-s-quantum-
leadership-may-hinge-on-public-perceptions/> accessed 12 February 2025.

QUANTUM INDEX REPORT 2025 | 88

 9 | Quantum Networking

9.1 | Quantum networks

Quantum networks are emergent communication systems that leverage the principles
of quantum mechanics to transmit information in new ways. Just as the classical internet
enabled email, video calls, and online banking, quantum networks aim to enable things
we can’t yet do with classical networks—especially in security, computing, and sensing.
Quantum networking has profound implications for national security, scientific discovery,
and economic competitiveness.1

Quantum networking refers to the tools, protocols, and systems that enable the
transmission of quantum information between different devices or locations. It
incorporates fiber-optic cables, quantum repeaters to extend range, quantum routers,
and the software layers needed to manage the system. The quantum internet is a closely
related concept: it refers to the broader vision of what we can do once those quantum
networks are built and scaled.

According to the 2024 report by the US National Quantum Initiative Advisory Committee
(NQIAC), quantum networking capabilities will “play a role in US economic prosperity
and national security” and continued investment in R&D of quantum networking is also
necessary to clarify the magnitude of that role.2

In 2022, the European Commission supported the creation of the Quantum Internet
Alliance (QIA) with €24 million in funding to build “a global quantum internet made in
Europe.” 3 In March 2025, QIA announced the creation of “the first operating system
designed for quantum networks” which will facilitate program applications for quantum
networks.4 The system is planned to be made accessible for a broader audience through
QIA’s quantum internet demonstrator.5

It is critical to note that as they are understood today, quantum networks might not
replace classical communications or the internet, however they have potential to offer
novel functionalities such as more secure communication and the ability to connect
quantum computers for enhanced computing power.6

89 | MIT INITIATIVE ON THE DIGITAL ECONOMY

9.2 | Quantum networking testbeds
Testbeds play a crucial role in the development of quantum networking and, by
extension, the quantum internet. The National Quantum Initiative Advisory Committee
defines a testbed as “a platform or facility that is accessible to multiple users to conduct
replicable and rigorous testing of component technologies, protocols, and systems
integration” and distinguishes it from demonstrators, prototypes and user facilities.7

Testbeds are essential for advancing quantum networking because they provide realistic
environments in which to explore the performance, interoperability, and scalability of
quantum components. According to the NQIAC, “strategically chosen and properly timed
quantum networking testbeds will serve an important role in developing the theoretical
underpinnings, technologies, security models, and application scenarios” for quantum
networks.8

The importance of testbeds lies not only in technological validation but also in risk
mitigation. Developing “right-sized” testbeds, those tailored in scope and cost to specific
research objectives, has been a priority both in the 2021 and 2024 reports.9,10 This
strategic investment approach aims to ensure that only mature, promising technologies
are scaled up for more extensive networks.

Investments in testbeds are not merely about testing hardware, they also represent
a commitment to advancing the foundational science and engineering needed for a
transformative quantum era.

Beyond technical development, testbeds also play a critical role in workforce training and
industry engagement. They provide hands-on opportunities for students, researchers,
and engineers from diverse backgrounds to develop quantum skills in a practical setting.
For industry, testbeds offer a collaborative space to test products, explore market-ready
solutions, and align with government and academic research. In this way, testbeds not
only advance technology but also support a broader ecosystem necessary for the growth
of quantum networking.

QUANTUM INDEX REPORT 2025 | 90

 In this chapter we present data that maps quantum networking testbeds across the
world from publicly available sources and in consultation with experts. Our current
dataset lists 13 testbeds in the US and 15 in Europe (including UK). The distribution of
these testbeds is illustrated in the maps below:

Quantum network testbeds in the US




   

   
€

 

      
     


 ­



 

 ­

­

Quantum network testbeds in Europe




   
 
 


  

  

    
   






91 | MIT INITIATIVE ON THE DIGITAL ECONOMY

 Number of quantum networking testbeds

15 13

9.3 | Future research

We aim to systematically map and document the locations of quantum networking
testbeds worldwide, creating a comprehensive open database accessible to researchers,
policymakers, and industry stakeholders. We will be making this data publicly available
to accelerate collaborative research, facilitate international partnerships, and inform
evidence-based policy decisions regarding quantum infrastructure development. We
would like to invite contributors and collaborators to join us in these efforts.

You can reach us at [email protected].

 Footnotes
1 The White House National Quantum Coordination Office, ‘A Strategic Vision for America’s Quantum Networks’ (2020).

2 ‘Quantum Networking: Findings and Recommendations for Growing American Leadership’ [2024] National Quantum Initiative
Advisory Committee.

3 Quantum Internet Alliance, ‘The Quantum Internet Alliance Will Build an Advanced European Quantum Internet Ecosystem’ (14
October 2022) <https://quantuminternetalliance.org/2022/10/14/the-quantum-internet-alliance-will-build-an-advanced-european-
quantum-internet-ecosystem/> accessed 31 March 2025.

4 C Delle Donne and others, ‘An Operating System for Executing Applications on Quantum Network Nodes’ (2025) 639 Nature 321.

5 QIA, ‘QIA Researchers Create First Operating System for Quantum Networks’ (Quantum Internet Alliance, 12 March 2025) <https://
quantuminternetalliance.org/2025/03/12/qia-researchers-create-first-operating-system-for-quantum-networks/> accessed 31 March
2025.

6 'Quantum Networking: Findings and Recommendations for Growing American Leadership’ (n 6).

7 ibid.

8 ibid.

9 National Science and Technology Council (n 3).

10 'Quantum Networking: Findings and Recommendations for Growing American Leadership’ (n 6).

QUANTUM INDEX REPORT 2025 | 92

 10 | Quantum Processor Benchmarking
It is challenging for non-experts to easily understand the performance of quantum
computing today. Without this understanding, making predictions about investment,
commercial deployments, use case testing, and overall strategy is prohibitive. This
opacity has many drivers, including the nascent state of the technology, the existence
of multiple modalities (types of quantum computers), the lack of independently verified
universal performance metrics, and the context-dependent connection between
hardware devices and quantum algorithms.

Benchmarks
To enable better insight into the current state of quantum computing performance, we
indexed and analyzed published data on over 200 Quantum Processing Units (QPUs)
from 17 countries, including retired, prototype, current, and announced QPUs. As of
April 2025, there are over 40 commercially available QPUs from at least two dozen
manufacturers.1

93 | MIT INITIATIVE ON THE DIGITAL ECONOMY

It is important to preface that quantum computers remain below the performance
capabilities of classical computers for all useful tasks today.

A useful analogy when considering QPU benchmarking is to consider the comparison

of racecars. Racecars benefit from large horsepower and torque ratings, lightweight
construction, independent suspensions, and performance aerodynamics. However,
lap times on a specific racetrack are the best overall measure of how well the various
elements perform together. QPUs have similar construction, design and performance
idiosyncrasies. There are three primary categories of QPU benchmarks that are useful
to consider:

Physical benchmarks
e.g., number of qubits and fidelity of the qubit gates.
These are the core metrics of a QPU. They are akin to the weight and torque values of a
racecar. While they are objective measures, they only provide a partial insight into the
likely overall performance when described in isolation. Physical benchmarks are the
category that QPU manufacturers are most likely to disclose and are a focus area for the
analysis below.

Aggregated benchmarks
e.g., Quantum Volume, CLOPS, and Logical Qubits.

These are various combinations of physical benchmarks. In the car analogy, these
benchmarks are similar to power-to-weight ratios. They are more useful than singular
benchmarks, but do not fully encapsulate the full performance of a QPU.

Application-level benchmarks
e.g., Q-Score and RACBEM.

These measure the performance of QPUs when solving specific problems. They are
similar to classical computing benchmarks such as LINPACK, which is used to rank
classical supercomputers. These benchmarks can help compare QPUs vs other
QPUs and also compare QPUs with classical computing devices. Application-level
benchmarks are analogous to a racecar’s lap time at a given racetrack in defined
weather conditions. They allow for a limited comparison between competing cars.
However, there are different benchmarks that put emphasis on different algorithmic
challenges, similar to how a Formula 1 car might be set up to perform well at the
Monaco Grand Prix, but would be ineffective on a NASCAR circuit. Manufacturers do
not regularly publish application-level benchmarks, as today’s QPUs are not capable
enough to run sizable applications. As QPUs become more powerful, we expect to be
able to track application-level benchmarks in future reports.

QUANTUM INDEX REPORT 2025 | 94

 Benchmarks
Our QPU dataset was primarily generated through a combination of manufacturer
announcements, online searches, and direct queries to QPU providers. The dataset
captured a variety of benchmarks. The key ones are:

Qubit Counts can be misleading as Fidelity: Quantum computers currently

the number of qubits increases, so too experience error rates several orders of
can error rates. This has even prompted magnitude higher than classical systems.
some manufacturers to reduce qubit These errors arise from imperfections
counts to improve overall performance in many areas such as control pulses,
in certain situations. For example, in inter-qubit couplings, and qubit state
2023, IBM followed the release of its measurements, and they reflect the
1121-qubit Condor and 433-qubit Osprey engineering limitations of today’s
QPUs with the higher-performing quantum hardware. To characterize and
133-qubit Heron. Similarly, Quantinuum compare quantum error rates, several
has been developing and promoting benchmarks have been introduced.
their achievements in higher overall These include single-qubit gate fidelity,
performance on their 20-Qubit H1 QPU2, two-qubit gate fidelity, readout fidelity,
even though their larger 56-Qubit H2 state preparation and measurement
QPU has been commercially available for (SPAM) error, decoherence-related errors,
several years already. This underscores and crosstalk error. Manufacturers use
that qubit count alone is not a definitive different terminologies to describe these
measure of QPU capability and must benchmarks, which can hinder direct
be considered alongside other key comparison (e.g. mid-circuit, median,
performance benchmarks. or average). Each of these benchmarks
captures inaccuracies in a specific
Coherence refers to how long a qubit
quantum operation essential to running
maintains its quantum state. Due to
a quantum circuit. Two-qubit gate fidelity
interactions with their environment,
is one of the most critical metrics as it is
qubits inevitably lose their quantum
often the bottleneck in large circuits. It is
information, a process known as
more prevalent in such circuits and has
decoherence. This is characterized by
higher error rates than one-qubit gates.
two timescales: T1 (energy relaxation) and
T2 (dephasing). T1 and T2 are important Quantum Volume (QV) was introduced
variables as they dictate the time that by IBM in 20173 and reflects different
calculations can be executed. Trapped physical-level benchmarks, such as gate
ion, and to a slightly lesser extent, fidelity, qubit count, and connectivity.
neutral atom modalities exhibit T2 times Unlike the volume of a cube, QV is not
several orders of magnitude longer than computed by simple multiplication, but
Superconducting qubits, offering an requires a complex set of statistical tests.
inherent advantage for applications that QV identifies the largest square-shaped
require longer coherence. random circuits (where the number of
qubits equals the circuit depth) that a

95 | MIT INITIATIVE ON THE DIGITAL ECONOMY

quantum device can implement with ineffective. Systems with fast gate
high fidelity. QV has been criticized by speeds, such as superconducting qubits
some scholars and by IBM itself as not and electron spins, often have shorter
being useful for larger devices and also coherence times than systems like
for relying on square circuits which are trapped ions or neutral atoms, which have
not typically representative of real-world slower gates but much longer coherence
quantum applications. Despite that, QV times. Current superconducting quantum
has been adopted by many hardware computers operate at raw gate speeds4
providers and is used in some spec in the 1–100 MHz range (and 1–10 kHz
sheets and marketing materials. when fully burdened with error correction
and overhead), these speeds are
Gate speed refers to the time it takes
significantly slower than classical CPUs,
to perform a single-qubit or two-qubit
which operate at 2–5 GHz. However,
gate operation. It is directly connected to
such a direct comparison is only partially
decoherence as together they determine
useful given the fundamentally different
how many operations can be conducted
computational approaches.
in a system before the qubit becomes

 Execution time
Gate speed is a critical but often underreported metric in quantum computing—many
hardware vendors do not disclose it at all. Yet it directly limits the runtime of quantum
circuits. For example, consider molecular simulations using a Quantum Phase Estimation
(QPE) algorithm, which can require circuits exceeding 1013 logical gates. On a Trapped-
ion quantum processor, where gate speeds are typically around 10 microseconds,
executing such a circuit even once would take5 several days. Since a single molecule
may require thousands of such full executions to achieve statistical confidence, and
since quantum error correction dramatically increases circuit depth and gate count,
total runtime could extend into years, well beyond practical limits for most applications.
Businesses evaluating quantum computing should estimate execution time based on
circuit size, hardware gate speed, and the overhead introduced by error correction. While
gate speed imposes a fundamental limit, total runtime can be reduced by optimizing
algorithms for parallelism, reducing circuit depth, and improving qubit fidelity to lower
the cost of error correction.

 Error correction
Error correction is fundamental to quantum computing. Methods like Surface Codes
require an increasing amount of qubits to make physical qubits into a logical one
(thousands, or tens of thousands for very large circuits). Google announced an important
breakthrough in 20246, demonstrating that their system operates below the fault-
tolerance threshold, meaning that adding more qubits and correction cycles leads to a
net decrease in logical error rates. This suggests a path forward for a scalable increase of
Logical Qubits with a set amount of physical qubits.
QUANTUM INDEX REPORT 2025 | 96
97 | MIT INITIATIVE ON THE DIGITAL ECONOMY
Putting a positive
spin on it
Composing a detailed QPU list is a challenging
task, further complicated by quantum
computing vendors often only highlighting their
most favorable performance QPU benchmarks.
For example, only three out of 31 Trapped Ion
QPUs in our dataset reference gate speed in
their publicly available specifications. Trapped
ions gates are approximately 10,000 times
slower than the fastest superconducting gates.
IBM is among the most transparent firms
when it comes to QPU benchmarking. Most of
its relevant performance metrics are publicly
accessible, including data for individual QPU
instances and even individual qubits.

QUANTUM INDEX REPORT 2025 | 98

 Modalities
There are several different approaches to designing and operating a specific physical
quantum computing system: these are known as modalities. Each modality uses
different technological approaches to encoding, manipulating, and reading out quantum
information, but result in similar functionality (also called gate-based or measurement-
based). Each modality has inherent benefits and weaknesses, reflected in benchmarks
such as number of qubits, fidelity, and speed. The table below illustrates the best-in-class
commercial or prototyped device from each modality. No clear winner has yet emerged
from these modalities.

A quantum circuit is a sequence of that manipulate the ions’ internal

operations (quantum gates) that a quantum states. Trapped Ions have high
QPU follows to solve a problem. It’s the fidelity, coherence, and qubit connectivity,
foundation of quantum algorithms, which but have slower gate speeds and have
use these circuits to process information. not yet scaled to large qubit counts.
Superconducting QPUs are electronic Photonic QPUs use photons as qubits.
circuits created with lithography Photons propagate through photonic
techniques used for classical computing integrated circuits containing linear
fabrication. These circuits are cooled optical elements such as beam splitters
to millikelvin temperatures that aid in and phase shifters, which can implement
suppressing thermal noise and allow certain quantum gates.
coherent quantum behavior. They excel
Neutral Atom QPUs use atoms—typically
in gate speed, qubit count, and have
alkali or alkaline-earth metals—that are
reasonable fidelities, but need to be
laser-cooled and confined in vacuum
cooled extensively.
chambers using optical and magnetic
Trapped-ion QPUs implement gate- trapping techniques. While the atoms
based quantum computing using themselves are ultracold, the hardware
individual ions held in place by operates at near room temperature.
radiofrequency traps. Gate operations are Relative to other modalities, they show
performed using lasers or microwaves promise in high qubit counts, but have

99 | MIT INITIATIVE ON THE DIGITAL ECONOMY

slower gate speed and lower fidelity and readout of large arrays remain active
although they are experiencing rapid areas of research.
development.7
Nitrogen-Vacancy (NV) centers in
Electron Spin QPUs leverage the diamond are a promising solid-state
quantum state of single electrons as platform, where a nitrogen impurity
qubits, offering relatively long coherence adjacent to a lattice vacancy hosts a
times and the potential for high-fidelity localized electron spin used as a qubit.
control with the added benefit of NV center QPUs can operate at room
compatibility with existing semiconductor temperature, unlike most other quantum
fabrication techniques. Scalable control computer hardware.

 Cats, Rails, and Flux

Superconducting quantum processors are among the most promising modalities.
Different sub-architectures are being pursued in designing these QPUs, such as the “Cat
qubits” pursued by Amazon and Alice & Bob. The Cat qubit is more difficult to fabricate
but increases the fidelity of the qubit as there is only one type of error, phase flip (no
bit flip error). Another interesting approach is taken by Quantum Circuits Inc., which is
pursuing Dual Rail QPUs that implement a physical redundancy to their Transmon qubits
to protect from errors (with a second cavity/rail). Atlantic Quantum is using Fluxonium
qubits instead of more traditional Transmon qubits. The Fluxonium qubit shows longer
coherence and error correction possibilities—again, at the cost of fabrication complexity.

 Annealers
A distinct class of quantum computer is the adiabatic quantum computer, also called an
annealer, inspired by the metallurgical process with the same name. The principle behind
quantum annealing is rooted in the adiabatic theorem, which states that a quantum
system will remain in its lowest-energy state if its parameters are changed slowly
enough and in the absence of significant noise. Using this phenomenon, an optimization
problem can be mapped as an energy landscape of possible solutions with the lowest
energy being the best solution. By annealing (i.e., adjusting the system parameters), the
system is guided toward the lowest-energy state, which—if reached—yields the optimal
solution. D-Wave produced the first commercial annealer in 2010, reaching 128 qubits.
Today, the company produces commercial systems with 5,000 qubits. Annealers are
treated separately in this report, as their architecture is not directly comparable to gate-
based quantum computers. Annealers can achieve much larger qubit counts, but do
not implement universal gate-based control. This limits annealers to a narrower class of
problems when compared to gate-based QPUs. Only one manufacturer besides D-Wave
has announced plans for releasing annealers in the future.

QUANTUM INDEX REPORT 2025 | 100

  Majorana Qubits
Another type of superconducting qubit is the Majorana qubit, which gained significant
attention in early 2025. Microsoft has invested in this approach for over a decade
and remains the primary industry player actively pursuing Majorana-based quantum
computing. This design uses superconducting nanowires that host Majorana zero
modes, exotic quasiparticles predicted to appear at the ends of the wire under
specific conditions. Microsoft’s Majorana 1 QPU represents a significant milestone
toward realizing a Majorana-based quantum processor, though the announcement8
(February 2025) has been met with skepticism from parts of the scientific community,
as conclusive evidence for the topological nature of the Majorana zero modes remains
under debate.

 Logical Qubits
Most quantum algorithms assume that a qubit is “perfect,” i.e., that it behaves perfectly
throughout the operations of the algorithm. In reality, qubits are error-prone and
short-lived, so we combine many physical qubits using quantum error correction
techniques (such as surface codes) to form a more stable unit known as a Logical
qubit. Some manufacturers have started using this metric for their QPUs. The term
can be misleading, as its practical utility depends heavily on the size and complexity
of the circuit it can reliably support. To be viable for applications such as simulating
complex molecules, a Logical qubit would need to support circuits millions to billions
of gates long—several orders of magnitude beyond current capabilities. As such, when
one is presented with a number of Logical qubits for a QPU, the key follow-up question
should be: “at what circuit depth?” Only then does the number of Logical qubits convey
meaningful information.

 Quantum emulators
Since quantum algorithms are inherently probabilistic, they can be emulated by classical
computers to a certain level, i.e., run on a classical computer without the need of a
QPU. Emulators do not physically utilize quantum effects such as entanglement or
superposition. They are particularly useful for testing, debugging, and benchmarking
quantum algorithms. Existing classical supercomputers can emulate circuits9 with
approximately 50 logical qubits. For classical computers, emulating additional qubits
becomes exponentially more difficult, while for QPUs, this requires adding incremental
logical qubits. Today’s best quantum computers are orders of magnitude slower and
more expensive to run than the equivalent CPUs.

101 | MIT INITIATIVE ON THE DIGITAL ECONOMY

Countries are in a strategic race to achieve high-
performance QPUs. The amount of commercially
available QPUs globally is in the range of 40
QPUs from two dozen manufacturers. The race is
led by the US.

QUANTUM INDEX REPORT 2025 | 102

 10.1 | QPUs per country and modality

Commercially available QPU models per country

Countries are in a strategic race to achieve high-performance QPUs. The amount

of commercially available QPUs globally is in the range of 40 QPUs from two dozen
manufacturers. The race is led by the United States, which has the highest number of
QPUs and diversity of modalities. China, Finland, and the Netherlands share the second
position but their commercial QPUs are of lower performance and smaller in size than
the US.

 Data considerations
We list QPUs that are commercially available per country and per quantum computing modality. Country
data is allocated based on the location of the manufacturer’s headquarters as described in their official
materials and website. The QPUs are classified as commercially available if there is public access to the
QPU either via on-premise or cloud. This also includes QPUs that may not be available on public clouds,
but access is provided to specific partner companies for commercial use, e.g., Google or PsiQuantum
QPUs. However, the device must be intended as a useful quantum computer for commercial use and not
solely for experimental purposes. The amount of QPUs is determined as uniquely differentiated products
actively provided and marketed by the provider, e.g., IBM Eagle and IBM Heron are two distinct QPUs,
but Eagle r3-Brussels and Eagle r3-Sherbrooke are considered as one QPU. The amount of QPUs is not
necessarily an indication of the progress of each country in quantum computing, as some manufacturers
have made several very small QPUs available for basic academic research and teaching, while others have
retired smaller but powerful QPUs from their offerings (e.g., IBM).

103 | MIT INITIATIVE ON THE DIGITAL ECONOMY

10.2 | QPUs per modality

Commercially available QPU models per modality

The leading quantum computing modality is superconducting with more than 40% of
commercially available QPUs. This is partially driven by the inherent manufacturing
benefits and a historic head start in R&D. However, photonics, trapped ions—and
especially neutral atoms and electron spins—are accelerating in quantity and it is
expected this trend will continue, while Annealers are becoming increasingly marginalized
and NMR QPUs are practically phased out (see Chapter 10.7.1).

QUANTUM INDEX REPORT 2025 | 104

 10.3.1 | Qubit count per modality

Largest QPU released, prototyped, or planned per year

Qubits

Superconducting QPUs expanded qubit count up to 2022. The more recent decline in
absolute numbers reflects an increased focus on improved error correction and higher
fidelity (see 10.3.2). Leading Trapped Ion devices are consistently growing their qubit count
on an annual basis. The qubit count amongst leading quantum annealers grew steadily
across the decade leading up to 2017 but has since stabilized.

 Data considerations
This graph shows the progression of the number of qubits in our dataset over time, considering only the
largest QPU announced per modality in that year. For a QPU to be considered, it needed to be officially
announced by a manufacturer and made commercially available in the given year (or expanded, e.g.,
Quantinuum H1 to H1-1). The data does not always show a steady increase, as some calendar years only
contained new QPUs that were smaller than previously available.

105 | MIT INITIATIVE ON THE DIGITAL ECONOMY

 10.3.2 | Fidelity per modality over time
Best 2Q-gate error rate over time
(available, planned, and prototyped QPUs)
2Q-Gate Error Rate 10x less errors->

Fidelity for 2-Qubit is a key metric of performance improvement. Trapped Ions have shown
consistent growth and demonstrated the highest overall fidelity. Superconducting QPUs
experienced a decline in top fidelity from 2018 to 2022 until peak fidelity was achieved by
the Alibaba QPU. Alibaba subsequently withdrew from the quantum computing market,
and IBM and Google caught up to similar fidelity rates in 2023 and 2024. Photonics and
NV Center QPUs are still relatively nascent and haven’t achieved the top-performing
fidelities of trapped ion and superconducting QPUs.

 Data considerations
This graph shows the progression of fidelity levels in new, commercially available QPUs in our dataset over
time. We only considered the highest fidelity announced per modality per year. Error rates are given in a
log10 scale, i.e. -3 translates to a 0.001 error rate which corresponds to a 99.9% or 0.999 fidelity. The noted
error rates should be treated with caution as there are significant differences in the way they are measured
for each QPU, e.g., mid-circuit vs first-gate-measurement, average vs median of several measurements
across qubits, different gates (CZ, SWAP, etc.), and different iterations of the same QPU that give
different values. In the case of conflicting values, we followed the data mismatch process detailed in the
methodology chapter.

QUANTUM INDEX REPORT 2025 | 106

 10.4 | Qubits versus 2Q gate fidelity

Qubits vs 2Q gate fidelity

Available CPUs

QuEra Aquila

IBM Heron r2 Fez

Qubits

IBM Heron
-
r1 Torino

IBM Eagle r3 Kyiv

Google Willow
Rigetti Ankaa 2

Origin Quantum Wukong

Google Sycamore Quantinuum Model H2

Oxford Quantum Circuits - OQC Toshiko
Infleqtion Sqorpius - 24
IonQ Forte
Quandela MosaiQ AQT Pine Quantinuum H2
SpinQ QPU - 20 IonQ Aria
Rigetti Ankaa-9Q-3 Quantinuum H1 Oxford Ionics N/A
IQM Deneb IQM Garnet
IonQ Harmony
SEEQC System Red IQM Spark Quantware Soprano- D
Quantinuum Model H1
HRL Laboratories N/A
Quantum Brilliance Gen 1

SpinQ Triangulum

2Q-Gate Error 10x > less errors

Error rates and 2-Qubit gate-errors are key metrics to benchmark QPUs. Together with
the amount of qubits they indicate one of the key combined metrics indicating progress
on QPUs. As such, the 2Q-gate errors are crucial to determine the performance of a QPU.

QuEra’s Aquila neutral atom chips are leading in qubit count but achieve a lower fidelity.
In contrast are the Trapped Ion devices from Quantinuum and Oxford Ionics which
reached a 0.999 (“triple-nine”) fidelity, an important rubicon. However, this was achieved
with relatively smaller qubit sizes. Amongst Superconducting QPUs, Google and IBM
are class leaders, with the IBM’s Heron r2 achieving the highest performance across this
benchmark.

 Data considerations
2-Qubit-Gates like CZ, CNOT, and SWAP are used for most quantum algorithms and make up the majority
of gates for these circuits. Error rates are given in a log10 scale, i.e., 10-3 translates to a 0.001 error rate,
which corresponds to a 99.9% or 0.999 fidelity. The noted error rates should be treated with caution
as there are significant differences in QPU measurement approaches, e.g., mid-circuit vs first-gate-
measurement, average vs median of several measurements across qubits, different gates (CZ, SWAP,
etc.), and different iterations of the same QPU that give different values. In case of conflicting values, we
followed the methodology of data mismatches detailed under the methodology section.

107 | MIT INITIATIVE ON THE DIGITAL ECONOMY

QUANTUM INDEX REPORT 2025 | 108
 10.5 | Gate time versus gate fidelity

2-Qubits gate time vs error rate

IBM Heron r2 - Fez

IQM Garnet
IBM Eagle r3- Sherbrooke

Infleqtion Sqorpius-24 IQM Spark

SpinQ Gemini
Rigetti Ankaa -9Q- 3 SpinQ QPU-2
2Q-Gate Error Rate 10x less errors>

IBM Eagle r3 - Kyiv SpinQ QPU - 10

SpinQ Triangulum
Rigetti Ankaa - 9Q- 1

Anyon Qube
Oxford Quantum Circuits - OQC Toshiko

Rigetti Ankaa-1
Oxford Quantum Circuits -OQC Lucy
Rigetti Aspen M-3

Rigetti Aspen M -2
Rigetti Agave

2Q-Gate Speed (logHZ) faster gates>

To determine the maximum length of a circuit for a QPU, an important metric is the
comparison of the speed of executing a single gate to how accurate this gate is (fidelity).
For real-life scenarios such as Shor’s Algorithm for decrypting information utilizing
RSA2048, more than 1013 Logical Gates are required. Slow gate speeds at that size lead
to calculation times of days or even months with some modalities.

1-Qubit and 2-Qubit Gates devices are identified above; the latter is more interesting
as they are more common in large circuits for most algorithms. The superconducting
IBM Heron and IQM Garnet are the class leaders. Notably absent are ion traps and
neutral atoms QPUs, as manufacturers tend not to disclose exact gate speeds, which are
expected to be orders of magnitude slower than superconducting QPUs (as can be seen
in the 1-Qubit graph).

109 | MIT INITIATIVE ON THE DIGITAL ECONOMY

 1-Qubit gate time vs error rate
1Q-Gate Error Rate 10x less errors>

1Q-Gate Speed (logHz) faster gates>

 Data considerations
We chose 2-Qubit-Gates like CZ, CNOT, and SWAP as they are used for most quantum algorithms and
make up the majority of gates for these circuits. The 2Q Gate time is the time required for the execution
of a 2-Qubit gate and is given in Hertz (Hz) in a logarithmic scale, where higher values mean faster gate
speeds, i.e., 7 logHz corresponds to a 100ns gate speed and 3 logHz to 1,000,000ns. The error rates are
given in a log10 scale where higher is better, i.e., 10-3 translates to a 0.001 error rate, which is 99.9%
fidelity. The datapoints with missing labels in the graphs are closely related QPUs (e.g., different instances
of IBM Eagle). To illustrate the performance comparison, we included the 1-Qubit Gate graph, which
shows that these would likely land on the top left quadrant, trading high fidelity for low gate speeds.

QUANTUM INDEX REPORT 2025 | 110

 10.6 | Quantum Volume

Max QPU Quantum Volume

(Log2) over time
Quantum volume (log2) ---> better

Max QPU quantum volume (Log2) over time

As described in an earlier section, Quantum Volume (QV) is an aggregated metric

designed to reflect a more holistic view of overall performance of a QPU. Although its
usefulness is heavily debated, manufacturers have been claiming this metric. There is a
substantial and consistent increase in QV performance of the top-performing QPU across
modalities. However, the stated QV values are hard to validate, and in some cases the only
data has been manufacturer claims.

 Data considerations
The Quantum Volume (in log2 basis) is listed for each QPU at the given year. QV is itself a debated
benchmark (even by IBM themselves), which has been used less in the last few years. Despite all
these caveats, we chose to include QV, as out of all aggregated metrics (like RACBEM, Algorithmic
Qubit, CLOPS, etc.) it is the one that has published values for a sizable amount of QPUs, and as such a
progression on quantum computing capabilities can be roughly traced over time. To note is also that the
values under 2025 and “N/A” are manufacturer plans, not yet available QPUs.

111 | MIT INITIATIVE ON THE DIGITAL ECONOMY

10.7.1 | A look into the future: QPUs per country and modality

Planned, prototyped, and available QPUs per country

Quantum computing remains in the early stages of technical development. Numerous

startups and established companies are actively developing prototypes and announcing
roadmaps for future QPUs. A comprehensive overview of these efforts provides valuable
insight into the evolving technological landscape and strategic directions within the
field. The US is the clear leader in the number and diversity of QPUs announced.
China is in second place, but is closely followed by France. The Netherlands, Germany,
Australia, Canada, Finland, and the UK have announced 7-10 QPUs each. This data gives
an approximate measure of country activity but is not an indication of QPU quality.
It is also an artifact of QPU planned announcements and does not fully reflect the
probability of their successful release.

QUANTUM INDEX REPORT 2025 | 112

 10.7.1 | A look into the future: QPUs per country and modality

QPUs commercially available, prototype, or planned

per modality; change in percentage points to current distribution of QPUs

Looking at the future for different modalities, electron spin, NV Centers and neutral atoms
are planned to become increasingly prevalent while NMRs and annealers are stagnant and
may be phased out. Photonics, superconducting, and trapped ion QPUs may have lower
overall shares in the future due to the higher growth levels of other modalities.

 Data considerations
The data in these graphs includes prototype devices, which are not intended for commercial usage and
are not available to the wider community of researchers but are used by a manufacturer for research to
develop a new product. It also includes Future Planned QPUs, which are announced in a manufacturer
roadmap or interview. Due to the dynamic evolution of startups in the space, recent announcements
and changes in QPU roadmaps may not be fully captured in our dataset. The amount of QPUs is not
necessarily an indication of the progress of each country in quantum computing, as some manufacturers
have made several very small QPUs available for basic academic research and teaching, while others have
retired smaller but powerful QPUs from their offerings (e.g., IBM).

113 | MIT INITIATIVE ON THE DIGITAL ECONOMY

 10.7.2 | A look into the future: qubit count and fidelity

QPUs vs 2Q gate fidelity

Announced QPUs
Qubits

2Q-Gate Error Rate 10x less errors

QPU manufacturers are beginning to share more forward-looking roadmaps, offering

insights into how their systems might compare across benchmarks. PsiQuantum leads in
projected qubit count, Quantinuum excels in error rates, and Infleqtion positions itself as a
balanced performer across both metrics.

QUANTUM INDEX REPORT 2025 | 114

 10.7.2 | A look into the future: qubit count and fidelity

Largest QPU released, prototyped, or planned per year

Qubits

While qubit counts are expected to continue rising, the pace of growth is moderating. This
reflects a shift in focus toward improving performance through better error correction and
higher qubit fidelity rather than simply scaling up qubit numbers.

115 | MIT INITIATIVE ON THE DIGITAL ECONOMY

 Best 2Q-gate error rate over time
Available, planned, and prototyped QPUs
2Q-Gate Error Rate 10x less errors>

Trapped ion systems aim for exponential gains in fidelity and are on track to continue
outperforming other modalities in that benchmark. Neutral atom platforms also show
strong ambitions in this area, while other technologies appear more conservative in their
likely fidelity trajectories.

 Data considerations
These graphs show the progression of the fidelity and qubits counts for published QPUs over time,
including any future plans, considering only the largest QPU announced per modality in that year. The
data does not demonstrate a constantly increasing trend, as some calendar years saw smaller QPUs than
previously available. Although approximately 60 manufacturers have announced approximately 90 future
QPU models, only 11 QPUs have been provided with both target qubit count and fidelities, which is why
there are fewer QPUs in the first graph, QPU vs 2-Qubit Fidelity.

QUANTUM INDEX REPORT 2025 | 116

 10.8 | Future research
Benchmarking is an important exercise in the advancement of our understanding of
quantum computing technology as it enables informed decision-making and supports
the longer-term goal of standardized comparisons. Our contribution of a publicly
accessible overview aims to improve general transparency and allows researchers and
community members to engage in a more detailed dialogue regarding the performance
of various systems. We encourage industry members and other stakeholders to
contribute to these goals by adding their data on an ongoing basis. This will help bridge
the gap in this domain, where standardized datasets have been scarce. This is a rapidly
and constantly evolving space. By keeping this resource updated and relevant, we are
hoping to foster further collaboration and innovation.

You can reach us at [email protected].

 Footnotes
1 The difference of 200 indexed QPUs vs 40 commercially available in approximate numbers: 40 are retired, 30 are prototypes but not
commercially accessible, and 90 are planned i.e., not released. To be commercially available, they have to be accessible via cloud or
on-premise (10 out of 40 QPUs in our dataset are on-premise).

2 ‘Quantinuum Extends Its Significant Lead in Quantum Computing, Achieving Historic Milestones for Hardware Fidelity and Quantum
Volume’ <https://www.quantinuum.com/blog/quantinuum-extends-its-significant-lead-in-quantum-computing-achieving-historic-
milestones-for-hardware-fidelity-and-quantum-volume> accessed 3 April 2025.

3 Bishop, L. S., Bravyi, S., Cross, A., Gambetta, J. M., & Smolin, J. (2017). Quantum Volume.

4 Olivier Ezratty, ‘Understanding Quantum Technologies 2024’ (Opinions Libres - Le blog d’Olivier Ezratty) <https://www.oezratty.net/
wordpress/2024/understanding-quantum-technologies-2024/> accessed 3 April 2025.

5 Raffaele Santagati and others, ‘Drug Design on Quantum Computers’ (2024) 20 Nature Physics 549.

6 Rajeev Acharya and others, ‘Quantum Error Correction below the Surface Code Threshold’ (2025) 638 Nature 920.

7 Simon J Evered and others, ‘High-Fidelity Parallel Entangling Gates on a Neutral-Atom Quantum Computer’ (2023) 622 Nature 268.

8 ‘Microsoft’s Majorana 1 Chip Carves New Path for Quantum Computing’ (Source) <https://news.microsoft.com/source/features/
innovation/microsofts-majorana-1-chip-carves-new-path-for-quantum-computing/> accessed 3 April 2025.

9 Thomas Häner and Damian S Steiger, ‘0.5 Petabyte Simulation of a 45-Qubit Quantum Circuit’, Proceedings of the International
Conference for High Performance Computing, Networking, Storage and Analysis (2017) <http://arxiv.org/abs/1704.01127> accessed 3
April 2025.

117 | MIT INITIATIVE ON THE DIGITAL ECONOMY

11 | Appendix

QUANTUM INDEX REPORT 2025 | 118

 Chapter 1 | Patents
The data in this section is based on patent families and was based on data acquired by
Accenture Research from LexisNexis Patent database based on select IPC codes relevant
to quantum technologies. No screening was made regarding international patent families.
The list of IPC codes used for this dataset can be found here:

IPC Code Description Sub-category

G06N0010200000 Models of quantum computing, e.g. Quantum
quantum circuits or universal quantum Computing
computers [2022.01]
G06N0010600000 Quantum algorithms, e.g. based on Quantum
quantum optimisation, or quantum Fourier Computing,
or Hadamard transforms Software
H04B0010700000 Photonic quantum communication Quantum
Communications,
Quantum
Networking
G06N0010000000 Quantum computing, i.e. information Quantum
processing based on quantum-mechanical Computing
phenomena
B82Y0020000000 Nanooptics, e.g., quantum optics or Quantum
photonic crystals Computing,
Hardware
G02F0002020000 Frequency-changing of light, e.g. by Quantum
quantum counters Computing,
Hardware
G06N0010800000 Quantum programming, e.g. interfaces, Quantum
languages or software-development kits Computing,
for creating or handling programs capable Software
of running on quantum computers;
Platforms for simulating or accessing
quantum computers, e.g. cloud-based
quantum computing
H01L0033040000 With a quantum effect structure or Quantum
superlattice, e.g. tunnel junction Computing,
Hardware
H01S0005340000 Comprising quantum well or superlattice Quantum
structures, e.g. single quantum well Computing
[SQW] lasers, multiple quantum well
[MQW] lasers or graded index separate
confinement heterostructure [GRINSCH]
lasers (H01S 5/36 takes precedence)
119 | MIT INITIATIVE ON THE DIGITAL ECONOMY
G02F0001017000 Structures with periodic or quasi periodic Quantum
potential variation, e.g. superlattices, Computing
quantum wells
H01L0029775000 With one-dimensional charge carrier gas Quantum
channel, e.g. quantum wire FET Computing
H01L0033060000 Within the light emitting region, e.g. Quantum
quantum confinement structure or tunnel Computing
barrier
H10K0050115000 Comprising active inorganic Quantum
nanostructures, e.g. luminescent quantum Computing
dot
B82Y0010000000 Nanotechnology for information Quantum
processing, storage or transmission, e.g. Computing,
quantum computing or single electron Quantum
logic Networking
B82Y0015000000 Nanotechnology for interacting, sensing or Quantum
actuating, e.g. quantum dots as markers in Computing
protein assays or molecular motors
G06N0010400000 Physical realisations or architectures of Quantum
quantum processors or components for Computing
manipulating qubits, e.g. qubit coupling or
qubit
G06N0010700000 Quantum error correction, detection or Quantum
prevention, e.g. surface codes or magic Computing
state distillation
G16C0010000000 Computational theoretical chemistry, Quantum
i.e. ICT specially adapted for theoretical Computing
aspects of quantum chemistry, molecular
mechanics, molecular dynamics or the like
H01L0029150000 Structures with periodic or quasi periodic Quantum
potential variation, e.g. multiple quantum Computing
wells, superlattices (such structures
applied for the control of light G02F 1/017;
applied in semiconductor lasers H01S
5/34)
H04B0010000000 Transmission systems employing Quantum
electromagnetic waves other than radio- Computing
waves, e.g. infrared, visible or ultraviolet
light, or employing corpuscular radiation,
e.g. quantum communication

QUANTUM INDEX REPORT 2025 | 120

 Regarding the categorization of the patent data presented by origin, Accenture
researchers applied the following methodology:
Step 1: For applicants with name but without type (e.g. university, corporate, etc.), search
was filtered using keywords such as specific origin entity specific keywords (such as
hospital, etc.) to categorize some of the applicants. The filtered results are stored as
Result 1.
Step 2: Researchers identified those without keywords (over 1,000 names) using am AI
LLM (Gemini-1.5-flash-001) to automatically detect their type. This result is stored as
Result 2.
Step 3: Researchers merged the applicants with identified types (from both initial
filtering and LLM results) with the applicants who originally had type information
provided by the vendor.
Step 4: Merged data was manually controlled to ensure non-duplication and accuracy.
The data presented in patent applications by country was provided by Accenture in
collaboration with The Quantum Insider (TQI). TQI acquired the patent data directly
from patent offices. For national patents, national patent office data for each country
(e.g. in the US patents are sourced from the United States Patent and Trademark Office
(USPTO); in China patents are sourced from the China National Intellectual Property
Administration). WO = World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), EP = European
Patent Office. For “Other Countries” it is typically a longer tail of nations which have been
aggregated. For some countries it is typically a longer tail of other countries which have
been aggregated.
The TQI patent data was collected based on the following keywords:
Adiabatic Theorem, Bosonic Creutz Ladder, Dicke Model, Distributed quantum
computation, Fault-tolerant quantum computation, gray zone assault, Hadamard Gate,
Harrow Hassidim Lloyd, Harrow Hassidim Lloyd, HHL algorithm, ion traps, Josephson
junctions, neutral atoms, Noisy Intermediate-Scale Quantum era, Open Quantum
Systems, Photonic Quantum Computing, QAOA, qbits, qbytes, QEC, QNLP, QSVM,
qtrits, Quantum accelerators, quantum annealing, Quantum Advantage, Quantum
accelerators, quantum annealing, Quantum Advantage, quantum algorithms, Quantum
applications, quantum approaches, quantum approximate optimization, quantum
approximate optimization algorithms, quantum arithmetic, Quantum artificial intelligence,
quantum backtracking, quantum bits, Quantum Bosonic Systems, quantum bytes,
quantum chaos, quantum chaos, quantum chemistry, Quantum circuits, quantum
classifier, quantum communication, quantum compiler, Quantum complexity, Quantum
component, Quantum computation, Quantum computational, Quantum computer,
Quantum Computing Architectures, Quantum Control, quantum correlation, Quantum
cryptanalysis, Quantum cryptoalgorithm, Quantum cryptog, Quantum cryptographic,
Quantum cryptology, Quantum cryptosystem, Quantum Cryptology, Quantum
Cryptology, Quantum cryptosystem, Quantum decoding, quantum devices, quantum
distillation, quantum dots, quantum dynamics, quantum dynamics, quantum eigensolver,

121 | MIT INITIATIVE ON THE DIGITAL ECONOMY

quantum encryption, Quantum Entanglement, quantum entanglement distillation,
quantum error correction, Quantum Error Detection, Quantum Field theory, quantum
Fourier transform, Quantum gas sensors, Quantum gate, Quantum gate fidelity, Quantum
gate-based, Quantum gates, quantum Grover, Quantum hardware, Quantum hardware
security, quantum image sensor, quantum imager array, quantum information, Quantum
information processing, Quantum information science, Quantum information systems,
Quantum information theory, Quantum interference, Quantum ions, quantum Josza,
Quantum Kernel, Quantum key, Quantum key distribution, Quantum key distribution
network, Quantum key distribution protocol, Quantum key distribution systems, quantum
key exchange, Quantum LDPC Codes, Quantum Linear Optics, quantum logic, quantum
machine learning, quantum machines, quantum magic states, Quantum Maps, Quantum
Measurement, Quantum Memristors, Quantum metrological, Quantum metrology,
Quantum metrology standards, Quantum Monte Carlo, Quantum Natural Language
Processing, Quantum Networks, quantum neural networks, Quantum Oscillator, quantum
phase amplifiers, Quantum precision measurement sensors, Quantum process, Quantum
processing, Quantum Programs, Quantum proof, quantum public key, Quantum Quantile
Mechanics, Quantum Quantizer, Quantum random number, Quantum random number
generation, Quantum random number generation device, Quantum random number
generator, Quantum random number sequences, Quantum safe network, Quantum
sensing, Quantum sensing technology, Quantum sensor, Quantum sensor networks,
quantum sensors, Quantum shared key, quantum Shor, Quantum Signal Processing,
quantum simulation, Quantum Simulator, quantum single photon, quantum software,
Quantum Speedup, quantum spin, quantum spintronics, quantum state, Quantum
Subroutines, Quantum superposition, quantum supremacy, quantum supremacy,
quantum switches, quantum systems, Quantum Technologies, quantum teleportation,
quantum tensor, quantum toffoli gate, Quantum transmons, quantum variational,
quantum video, Quantum Week, Quantum-enhanced, Quantum-enhanced, Quantum-
resistance, qubits, qubytes, qudits, qumodes, qutrits, silicon qubits, VQE.

QUANTUM INDEX REPORT 2025 | 122

 Chapter 2 | Academic research
Accenture provided the data for this chapter which was gathered from the Critical
Technology Tracker Project by the Australian Strategic Policy Institute1 (ASPI).

ASPI methodology summary:

The Web of Science (WoS) Core Collection database was used as the primary source
of research publication data. WoS Core Collection was chosen because it has well-
understood performance characteristics and is used extensively by researchers who
study scientific trends. The dataset includes conference and journal publications and
excluded bibliographic records that were deemed to not reflect research advances,
such as book reviews, retracted publications and letters submitted to academic journals.
In addition, data from the Research Organization Registry (ROR) was used to clean
institution names, and data from the Open Researcher and Contributor ID (ORCID)
database was used to build career profiles for the researchers plotted in the ASPI Talent
Tracker.

Country-level quality metrics:

The methodology includes “both the top 10% and the H-index as neither is perfect and
both add a unique insight.” In technologies in which first and second place flip depending
on which quality metric is used, the race really is too close to call. However, more often,
the lead is large and unambiguous, and both metrics are consistent regarding who is
leading.”
ASPI methodology states that “The top 10% of the most highly cited papers were
analyzed to generate insights into which countries are publishing the greatest share
of high-quality, innovative and high-impact research. Credit for each publication was
divided among authors and their affiliations and not assigned only to the first author (for
example, if there were two authors, they would each be assigned half the allocation).
Fractional allocation of credit is a better prediction of individuals who go on to win Nobel
Prizes or fellowship of prestigious societies. Fractional allocation of credit was used for
all metrics.’
‘The number of institutions that a country has in the world’s top 10 institutions is used
to illustrate research concentration and dominance. This list is based on the number of
papers that the institutions have in the top 10% of highly cited papers.”

Definitions as explained in the ASPI methodology:

Quality Metrics: “Distinguishing innovative and high-impact research papers from low-
quality papers is critical when estimating the current and future technical capability of
nations. Not all the millions of research papers published each year are high quality.”
Citation: “When a scientific paper references another paper, that’s known as a citation.
The number of times a paper is cited reflects the impact of the paper. As time goes by,
there are more opportunities for a paper to be cited, so only papers of a similar age
should be compared using citation counts (as was done in this report).” This data was
123 | MIT INITIATIVE ON THE DIGITAL ECONOMY
Chapter 3 | Venture funding
This data was gathered by Accenture in collaboration with The Quantum Insider (TQI)
using The Quantum Insider Funding Database. The methodology and limitations are
explained below:
Funding numbers are obtained from open media sources (press releases, articles, etc).
For example, Riverlane funding round:
https://www.riverlane.com/press-release/riverlane-raises-75-million-to-meet-surging-
global-demand-for-quantum-error-correction-technology.
Where possible TQI emails the companies to validate if they are missing investors or
details. Not all companies disclose the size of funding rounds (e.g. QEDMA shows as
$4.7 million seed but they haven't publicly disclosed their top up round so they have
asked not to be included in the dataset). Based on this, there will be gaps in reporting
and the data should be viewed as indicative rather than complete.

Chapter 4 | Quantum in corporate communications

The data was collected by Accenture through AlphaSense on 10th March 2025 using
keyword search term “quantum computing.” The documents presented in this section
include five categories, (1) Company Documents consisting of US Filings, Global Filings,
Company House Filings, Private Company Filings, Event Transcripts, ESG, Thought
Leadership, Other Company Publications; (2) Research Documents consisting of Broker
Research, IDC Research, Consultancy Research, Broker Feed; (3) Transcript Documents
consisting of Event Transcripts; (4) News Documents consisting of Financial Times,
Market News, General News, Trade Publications, RSS Feeds, LexisNexis, (5) Expert Call
Documents consisting of Expert interviews.

Chapter 5 | Policy
The policy research was completed through comprehensive desk research specifically
designed to capture the rapidly evolving landscape of quantum technology initiatives
across multiple countries, including detecting and analyzing the national strategy
documents and implementation plans, which involved cross-referencing multiple official
sources and analysis of policy implementation progress.

QUANTUM INDEX REPORT 2025 | 124

 Chapter 6 | Workforce
This data was gathered by Accenture and sourced from Lightcast. Lightcast integrates
economic, labor market, demographic, education, profile, and job posting data from
dozens of government and private-sector sources, creating a comprehensive and current
dataset that includes both published data and detailed estimates with full United States
coverage. Further information on Lightcast data sources available here.
The following keywords were used in our Lightcast database searches:
Quantum skills keywords: Quantum Gates, Heteronuclear Single Quantum Coherence
Spectroscopy,Heteronuclear Multiple Quantum Coherence,Quantum Link,Quantum
Mechanics/Molecular Mechanics (QM/MM),Quantum Point Contact,Quantum Phase
Transition,Quantum Dynamics,Quantum Imaging,Quantum Technology,Superconducting
Quantum Interference Device (SQUID),Amazon Quantum Ledger Database
(QLDB),Quantum Cryptography,Quantum GIS (QGIS),Quantum Scalar Servers,Quantum
Chemistry,Quantum Mechanics,Quantum Physics,Quantum Information
Sciences,Quantum Computing,Quantum Dots,Quantum Information,Quantum
ESPRESSO.
Quantum mentions keywords: quantum computer quantum computing quantum
supremacy quantum entanglement quantum superposition quantum bit qubit topological
qubit silicon spin qubit quantum advantage quantum simulation quantum machine
learning quantum optimization quantum chemistry optical quantum computing gate
model quantum computing photonic quantum computer quantum dots superconducting
quantum computer trapped ion quantum computer quantum annealing quantum as a
service quantum cloud post-quantum cryptography PQC quantum algorithm Shor's
algorithm Grover's algorithm quantum encryption quantum research quantum use case

Chapter 7 | Education
The education data represented in the “Postgraduate Education” section was collected
from the StudyPortals resource and presents the master’s degree programs that make a
specific reference to “quantum” in the degree name found in the named resource.
Education enrollment data was collected from the publicly available data set “Current
Term Enrollment Estimates” with the January 2025 updates of the NSC Research Center.
The NSC states in their methodology for compiling the relevant dataset that the data is
based on administrative data directly derived from college and university registrars. NSC
declares that since the fall of 2021, “institutions actively submitting enrollment data to
the Clearinghouse account for 97 percent of all enrollments at Title IV, degree-granting
institutions in the US.”
The 2021 US Report “The Role of International Talent in Quantum Information Science”
states that “the most QIST-relevant degree fields are physics, electrical engineering, and
computer science” and explains that these domains were selected based on two criteria:

125 | MIT INITIATIVE ON THE DIGITAL ECONOMY

preliminary search of keywords for online job postings and, analysis of doctoral thesis
titles, abstracts, and keywords. Therefore we retrieved the student enrollment data for
the relevant three degrees.
We used Electrical, Electronics, and Communications Engineering (141000 – Major Field
Group CIP) enrollment data as a subcategory of Engineering; Physics degree (400800
– Major Field Group CIP) enrollment data as a subcategory of Physical Sciences;
and Computer Science degree (110700 – Major Field Group CIP) enrollment data as a
subcategory of Computer and Information Sciences and Support Services. The data
categorization had challenges as the major field groups at times had interconnected
degrees such as “Computer and Information Science, general”, “Astronomy and
Astrophysics” which are not included in the subject-level enrollment data. In order to
provide a fuller picture, the report also presents the enrollment numbers for the three
major field families Engineering, Physical Sciences, and Computer and Information
Sciences and Support Services.

Chapter 8 | Public opinion

“Survey on Public Opinion” refers to a general population survey conducted online
in October 2024 with US participants. The survey instrument was administered to a
representative panel of 1,375 US residents, with demographic sampling aligned to US
Census Bureau distributions for both gender and age groups, ensuring population
representativeness. Data collection procedures followed established survey research
protocols, with items grouped by thematic content to enhance respondent engagement
and reduce cognitive load. The five-point scale format was selected to balance response
sensitivity with participant comprehension, avoiding the potential ambiguity associated
with finer-grained scales while still capturing meaningful variations in opinion intensity.
Each item was measured using a symmetric response format anchored by “Strongly
Disagree” and “Strongly Agree,” with intermediate positions of “Somewhat Disagree,”
“Neither Agree nor Disagree,” and “Somewhat Agree.” Regarding emotional response
questions, the response format was anchored by “Very Nervous” and “Very Excited,”
with intermediate positions of “Somewhat Nervous,” “Neither Nervous nor Excited” and
“Somewhat Excited.” This approach enabled precise quantification of attitudinal responses
while maintaining respondent comprehension through clear, distinct categories. To better
demonstrate the difference in responses, in the relevant chapter graphs were prepared
to represent the ratio of “Agree” and “Disagree” responses as well as “Positive” and
“Negative” emotional responses where the neutral answers were not represented. For
the referred visualizations “Strongly Disagree” and “Somewhat Disagree” responses
were grouped into the category “Disagree”, and “Strongly Agree” and “Somewhat Agree”
responses were grouped into the category “Agree”. Utilizing the same approach, for
the visualizations of positive and negative responses, “Very Nervous” and “Somewhat
Nervous” responses were grouped into the category “Negative,” and “Very Excited” and
“Somewhat Excited” responses were grouped into the category “Positive.”

QUANTUM INDEX REPORT 2025 | 126

 Chapter 9 | Quantum networking testbeds
The dataset was created by merging input from the Center for Quantum Networks
(CQN) researchers, QIR professional network and publicly available information by GQI
Quantum Computing Report (accessed in June 2024).

Chapter 10 | Quantum processor benchmarking

The dataset of QPUs was composed by a combination of a keyword-based online search
and official announcements, references to QPU lists made available to us, and direct
query to QPU manufacturers. The data was collected from January 2024 to April 2025.
In particular, a list of known manufacturers was created based on the sources of The
Quantum Insider, Olivier Ezratty, and Wikipedia. For each manufacturer, the official
website was interrogated to retrieve the indicated benchmarks. For datasets not on
manufacturer's websites, we utilized web searches (Google) for official announcements
from manufacturers and related news articles.
Additionally, scholarly articles were identified via Arxiv and Google Scholar using
the following keywords for benchmarks: Quantum Volume, CLOPS, EPLG, Q-Score,
benchmarking.
During this process, additional manufacturers/QPUs were identified and added to the
QPU list. Lastly, each manufacturer was contacted for verification of records—either
to an existing contact of the QIR team, or to the communications address listed on
manufacturer's website. The final list was reviewed by the QIR team and experts in their
professional network.

 Footnotes
1 Gaida, J., Wong-Leung, J., & Robin, S. (2023). Critical technology tracker. Who Is Leading the Critical Technology Race. A Project by
the Australian Strategic Policy Institute. https://techtracker.aspi.org.au

127 | MIT INITIATIVE ON THE DIGITAL ECONOMY

QUANTUM INDEX REPORT 2025 | 128
 Quantum Index Report 2025
MIT Initiative on the Digital Economy

245 First Street, Room E94-1521, Cambridge, MA 02142 USA

qir.mit.edu | ide.mit.edu

129 | MIT INITIATIVE ON THE DIGITAL ECONOMY