1. |
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY |
1.1. |
Quantum Computing Market: Analyst Opinion |
1.2. |
The race for quantum computing: an ultra-marathon not a sprint |
1.3. |
Introduction to quantum computers |
1.4. |
Quantum computer hardware sales could be a USD$10B by 2045, with a CAGR of 30% |
1.5. |
Summary of applications for quantum computing |
1.6. |
The number of companies commercializing quantum computers rapidly grew in the last 20 years |
1.7. |
Investment in quantum computing is growing |
1.8. |
The business model for quantum computing |
1.9. |
Colocation data centers key partners for quantum hardware developers to reach more customers |
1.10. |
Four major challenges for quantum hardware |
1.11. |
Shortage of quantum talent is a challenge for the industry |
1.12. |
Blueprint for a quantum computer: qubits, initialization, readout, manipulation |
1.13. |
How is the industry benchmarked? |
1.14. |
Competing quantum computer architectures: Summary table |
1.15. |
Introduction to the IDTechEx Quantum Commercial Readiness Level (QCRL) |
1.16. |
Predicting the tipping point for quantum computing |
1.17. |
Demand for quantum computer hardware will lag user number |
1.18. |
Comparing the physical qubit roadmap of major quantum hardware developers (chart) |
1.19. |
Comparing the qubit roadmap of major quantum hardware developers (discussion) |
1.20. |
Comparing characteristics of different quantum computer technologies |
1.21. |
Summarizing the promises and challenges of leading quantum hardware |
1.22. |
Summarizing the promises and challenges of leading quantum hardware |
1.23. |
Entering the logical qubit era (1) |
1.24. |
Comparing progress in logical qubit number scalability between key players/qubit modalities |
1.25. |
Business Model Trends: Vertically Integrated vs. The Quantum 'Stack' |
1.26. |
Infrastructure Trends: Modular vs. Single Core |
1.27. |
Overviewing early adopters of on-premises quantum computers |
1.28. |
China's tech giants change course away from quantum and towards AI |
1.29. |
Big chip makers are advancing their quantum computing capabilities |
1.30. |
Confidence in the potential of topological quantum computing is rising |
1.31. |
Quantum and AI - ally or competitor? |
1.32. |
IBM: Quantum roadmap update 2024 |
1.33. |
IQM release new roadmap promising quantum advantage by 2030 |
1.34. |
Quantinuum: winning the race for three 9s and an accelerated development roadmap |
1.35. |
IonQ: Secures a $54.5M contract with the U.S. Air Force Research Lab and expands photonic capabilities |
1.36. |
Oxford Ionics achieves record fidelities in the lab |
1.37. |
Aegiq - offering versatility without a universal machine |
1.38. |
PsiQuantum benefiting from over $1B in investment to build quantum computing data centers in Australia and the US (1) |
1.39. |
Pasqal: reaching the 1000 qubit milestone in 2024 and planning for 10,000 by 2026 |
1.40. |
Infleqtion (Cold Quanta) achieve 'world's largest qubit array', and what to make it ten times bigger by 2030 |
1.41. |
Quantum Brilliance offer lower power quantum solutions for HPC integration in the NISQ era, and opportunities on the edge long term |
1.42. |
D-Wave intensifies focus on increasing production application deployments |
1.43. |
Energy consumption concerns continue to present challenges for next generation computing |
1.44. |
'NISQ is dead' |
1.45. |
NATO announced first quantum strategy in 2024 |
1.46. |
The value proposition of quantum computing, and risk to security, remains a key driver for development |
1.47. |
Main conclusions (I) |
1.48. |
Main conclusions (II) |
2. |
INTRODUCTION TO QUANTUM COMPUTING |
2.1. |
Chapter overview |
2.2. |
Sector overview |
2.2.1. |
Introduction to quantum computers |
2.2.2. |
Investment in quantum computing is growing |
2.2.3. |
Government funding in the US, China, and Europe is driving the commercializing of quantum technologies |
2.2.4. |
USA National Quantum Initiative aims to accelerate research and economic development |
2.2.5. |
The UK National Quantum Technologies Program |
2.2.6. |
Eleven quantum technology innovation hubs now established in Japan |
2.2.7. |
Quantum in South Korea: ambitions to become a global leader in the 2030s |
2.2.8. |
Quantum in Australia: creating clear benchmarks of national quantum eco-system success |
2.2.9. |
Collaboration versus quantum nationalism |
2.2.10. |
The quantum computing industry is becoming more competitive which is driving innovation |
2.2.11. |
The business model for quantum computing |
2.2.12. |
Commercial partnership is driver for growth and a tool for technology development |
2.2.13. |
Partnerships forming now will shape the future of quantum computing for the financial sector |
2.2.14. |
Four major challenges for quantum hardware |
2.2.15. |
A complex eco-system |
2.2.16. |
Shortage of quantum talent is a challenge for the industry |
2.2.17. |
Timelines for ROI are unclear in the NISQ (noisy intermediate scale quantum) era |
2.2.18. |
Competition with advancements in classical computing |
2.2.19. |
Value capture in quantum computing |
2.3. |
Technical primer |
2.3.1. |
Classical vs. Quantum |
2.3.2. |
Superposition, entanglement, and observation |
2.3.3. |
Classical computers are built on binary logic |
2.3.4. |
Quantum computers replace binary bits with qubits |
2.3.5. |
Blueprint for a quantum computer: qubits, initialization, readout, manipulation |
2.3.6. |
Case study: Shor's algorithm |
2.3.7. |
'Hack Now Decrypt Later' (HNDL) and preparing for Q-Day/ Y2Q |
2.3.8. |
Applications of quantum algorithms |
2.3.9. |
Chapter summary |
3. |
BENCHMARKING QUANTUM HARDWARE |
3.1. |
Chapter overview |
3.2. |
Qubit benchmarking |
3.2.1. |
Noise effects on qubits |
3.2.2. |
Comparing coherence times |
3.2.3. |
Qubit fidelity and error rate |
3.3. |
Quantum computer benchmarking |
3.3.1. |
Quantum supremacy and qubit number |
3.3.2. |
Logical qubits and error correction |
3.3.3. |
Introduction to quantum volume |
3.3.4. |
Error rate and quantum volume |
3.3.5. |
Square circuit tests for quantum volume |
3.3.6. |
Critical appraisal of the importance of quantum volume |
3.3.7. |
Algorithmic qubits: A new benchmarking metric? |
3.3.8. |
Companies defining their own benchmarks |
3.3.9. |
Operational speed and CLOPS (circuit layer operations per second) |
3.3.10. |
Conclusions: determining what makes a good computer is hard, and a quantum computer even harder |
3.4. |
Industry benchmarking |
3.4.1. |
The DiVincenzo criteria |
3.4.2. |
Competing quantum computer architectures: Summary table |
3.4.3. |
IDTechEx - Quantum commercial readiness level (QCRL) |
3.4.4. |
QCRL scale (1-5, commercial application focused) |
3.4.5. |
QCRL scale (6-10, user-volume focused) |
4. |
MARKET FORECASTS |
4.1. |
Forecasting Methodology Overview |
4.2. |
Methodology: Roadmap for quantum commercial readiness level by technology |
4.3. |
Methodology: Establishing the total addressable market for quantum computing |
4.4. |
Forecast for total addressable market for quantum computing |
4.5. |
Predicting cumulative demand for quantum computers over time (1) |
4.6. |
Predicting cumulative demand for quantum computers over time (2) |
4.7. |
Forecast for installed base of quantum computers (2025-2045, logarithmic scale) |
4.8. |
Forecast for installed based of quantum computers by technology (2025-2045) - logarithmic scale |
4.9. |
Forecast for quantum computer pricing |
4.10. |
Forecast for annual revenue from quantum computer hardware sales, 2025-2045 |
4.11. |
Forecast annual revenue from quantum computing hardware sales (breakdown by technology), 2025-2045 |
4.12. |
Forecasting discussion - challenges in twenty-year horizons |
4.13. |
Quantum computer market coverage: key forecasting changes since the last report |
5. |
COMPETING QUANTUM COMPUTER ARCHITECTURES |
5.1. |
Introduction to competing quantum computer architectures: |
5.2. |
Superconducting |
5.2.1. |
Introduction to superconducting qubits (I) |
5.2.2. |
Introduction to superconducting qubits (II) |
5.2.3. |
Superconducting materials and critical temperature |
5.2.4. |
Initialization, manipulation, and readout |
5.2.5. |
Superconducting quantum computer schematic |
5.2.6. |
Comparing key players in superconducting quantum computing (hardware) |
5.2.7. |
IBM: Quantum roadmap update 2024 |
5.2.8. |
Roadmap for superconducting quantum hardware (chart) |
5.2.9. |
Roadmap for superconducting quantum hardware (discussion) |
5.2.10. |
Simplifying superconducting architecture requirements for scale-up |
5.2.11. |
IQM release new roadmap promising quantum advantage by 2030 |
5.2.12. |
Critical material chain considerations for superconducting quantum computing |
5.2.13. |
SWOT analysis: superconducting quantum computers |
5.2.14. |
Key conclusions: superconducting quantum computers |
5.3. |
Trapped ion |
5.3.1. |
Introduction to trapped-ion quantum computing |
5.3.2. |
Initialization, manipulation, and readout for trapped ion quantum computers |
5.3.3. |
Materials challenges for a fully integrated trapped-ion chip |
5.3.4. |
Comparing key players in trapped ion quantum computing (hardware) |
5.3.5. |
Roadmap for trapped-ion quantum computing hardware (chart) |
5.3.6. |
Roadmap for trapped-ion quantum computing hardware (discussion) |
5.3.7. |
Quantinuum - winning the race for three 9s and an accelerated development roadmap |
5.3.8. |
IonQ: Secures a $54.5M contract with the U.S. Air Force Research Lab and expands photonic capabilities |
5.3.9. |
Oxford Ionics achieves record fidelities in the lab |
5.3.10. |
SWOT analysis: trapped-ion quantum computers |
5.3.11. |
Key conclusions: trapped ion quantum computers |
5.4. |
Photonic platform |
5.4.1. |
Introduction to light-based qubits |
5.4.2. |
Comparing photon polarization and squeezed states |
5.4.3. |
Overview of photonic platform quantum computing |
5.4.4. |
Initialization, manipulation, and readout of photonic platform quantum computers |
5.4.5. |
Comparing key players in photonic quantum computing |
5.4.6. |
PsiQuantum benefiting from over $1B in investment to build quantum computing data centers in Australia and the US (1) |
5.4.7. |
PsiQuantum benefiting from over $1B in investment to build quantum computing data centers in Australia and the US (2) |
5.4.8. |
Aegiq - offering versatility without a universal machine |
5.4.9. |
Roadmap for photonic quantum hardware (chart) |
5.4.10. |
Roadmap for photonic quantum hardware (discussion) |
5.4.11. |
SWOT analysis: photonic quantum computers |
5.4.12. |
Key conclusions: photonic quantum computers |
5.5. |
Silicon Spin |
5.5.1. |
Introduction to silicon-spin qubits |
5.5.2. |
Qubits from quantum dots ('hot' qubits are still pretty cold) |
5.5.3. |
CMOS readout using resonators offers a speed advantage |
5.5.4. |
The advantage of silicon-spin is in the scale not the temperature |
5.5.5. |
Initialization, manipulation, and readout |
5.5.6. |
Comparing key players in silicon spin quantum computing |
5.5.7. |
Roadmap for silicon-spin quantum computing hardware (chart) |
5.5.8. |
Roadmap for silicon spin (discussion) |
5.5.9. |
SWOT analysis: silicon spin quantum computers |
5.5.10. |
Key conclusions: silicon spin quantum computers |
5.6. |
Neutral atom (cold atom) |
5.6.1. |
Introduction to neutral atom quantum computing |
5.6.2. |
Entanglement via Rydberg states in Rubidium/Strontium |
5.6.3. |
Initialization, manipulation and readout for neutral-atom quantum computers |
5.6.4. |
Comparing key players in neutral atom quantum computing (hardware) |
5.6.5. |
Roadmap for neutral-atom quantum computing hardware (chart) |
5.6.6. |
QuEra receiving strategic investment from Google |
5.6.7. |
Atom Computing partner with Microsoft |
5.6.8. |
Pasqal: reaching the 1000 qubit milestone in 2024 and planning for 10,000 by 2026 |
5.6.9. |
Infleqtion (Cold Quanta) achieve 'world's largest qubit array', and what to make it ten times bigger by 2030 |
5.6.10. |
Roadmap for neutral-atom quantum computing hardware (discussion) |
5.6.11. |
SWOT analysis: neutral-atom quantum computers |
5.6.12. |
Key conclusions: neutral atom quantum computers |
5.7. |
Diamond defect |
5.7.1. |
Introduction to diamond-defect spin-based computing |
5.7.2. |
Lack of complex infrastructure for diamond defect hardware enables early-stage MVPs |
5.7.3. |
Supply chain and materials for diamond-defect spin-based computers |
5.7.4. |
Comparing key players in diamond defect quantum computing |
5.7.5. |
Roadmap for diamond defect quantum computing hardware (chart) |
5.7.6. |
Roadmap for diamond-defect based quantum computers (discussion) |
5.7.7. |
Quantum Brilliance offer lower power quantum solutions for HPC integration in the NISQ era, and opportunities on the edge long term |
5.7.8. |
SWOT analysis: diamond-defect quantum computers |
5.7.9. |
Key conclusions: diamond-defect quantum computers |
5.8. |
Topological qubits (Majorana) |
5.8.1. |
Topological qubits (Majorana mode) |
5.8.2. |
Initialization, manipulation, and readout of topological qubits |
5.8.3. |
Topological qubits still require cryogenic cooling |
5.8.4. |
Microsoft are the only company pursuing topological qubits so far |
5.8.5. |
Roadmap for topological quantum computing hardware (chart) |
5.8.6. |
Confidence in the potential of topological quantum computing is rising |
5.8.7. |
Roadmap for topological quantum computing hardware (discussion) |
5.8.8. |
SWOT analysis: topological qubits |
5.8.9. |
Key conclusions: topological qubits |
5.9. |
Quantum annealers |
5.9.1. |
Introduction to quantum annealers |
5.9.2. |
How do quantum processors for annealing work? |
5.9.3. |
Initialization and readout of quantum annealers |
5.9.4. |
Annealing is best suited to optimization problems |
5.9.5. |
Commercial examples of use-cases for annealing |
5.9.6. |
Clarity on annealing related terms |
5.9.7. |
Comparing key players in quantum annealing |
5.9.8. |
Roadmap for neutral-atom quantum computing hardware (chart) |
5.9.9. |
D-Wave intensifies focus on increasing production application deployments |
5.9.10. |
Roadmap for quantum annealing hardware (discussion) |
5.9.11. |
SWOT analysis: quantum annealers |
5.9.12. |
Key conclusions: quantum annealers |
5.10. |
Chapter summary |
5.10.1. |
Summarizing the promises and challenges of leading quantum hardware |
5.10.2. |
Summarizing the promises and challenges of leading quantum hardware |
5.10.3. |
Competing quantum computer architectures: Summary table |
5.10.4. |
Main conclusions (I) |
5.10.5. |
Main conclusions (II) |
6. |
INFRASTRUCTURE FOR QUANTUM COMPUTING |
6.1. |
Chapter Overview |
6.2. |
Hardware agnostic platforms for quantum computing represent a new market for established technologies. |
6.3. |
Infrastructure Trends: Modular vs. Single Core |
6.4. |
Introduction to cryostats for quantum computing |
6.5. |
Understanding cryostat architectures |
6.6. |
Bluefors are the market leaders in cryostat supply for superconducting quantum computers (chart) |
6.7. |
Bluefors are the market leaders in cryostat supply for superconducting quantum computers (discussion) |
6.8. |
Opportunities in the Asian supply chain for cryostats |
6.9. |
Cryostats need two forms of helium, with different supply chain considerations |
6.10. |
Helium isotope (He3) considerations |
6.11. |
Summary of cabling and electronics requirements inside a dilution refrigerator for quantum computing |
6.12. |
Qubit readout methods: microwaves and microscopes |
6.13. |
Pain points for incumbent platform solutions |
7. |
AUTOMOTIVE AND FINANCE APPLICATIONS FOR QUANTUM COMPUTING |
7.1. |
Automotive applications of quantum computing |
7.1.1. |
Quantum chemistry offers more accurate simulations to aid battery material discovery |
7.1.2. |
Quantum machine learning could make image classification for vehicle autonomy more efficient |
7.1.3. |
Quantum optimization for assembly line and distribution efficiency could save time, money, and energy |
7.1.4. |
Most automotive players are pursuing quantum computing for battery chemistry |
7.1.5. |
The automotive industry is yet to converge on a preferred qubit modality |
7.1.6. |
Partnerships and collaborations for automotive quantum computing |
7.1.7. |
Mercedes: Case study in remaining hardware agnostic |
7.1.8. |
Tesla: Supercomputers not quantum computers |
7.1.9. |
Summary of key conclusions |
7.1.10. |
Analyst opinion on quantum computing for automotive |
7.2. |
Finance Applications of Quantum Computing |
7.2.1. |
Despite its early stage, preparing for quantum computing now is a key strategy in the finance industry (1) |
7.2.2. |
Despite its early stage, preparing for quantum computing now is a key strategy in the finance industry (2) |
7.2.3. |
Use cases of quantum computing in finance |
7.2.4. |
HSBC and Quantum Key Distribution (1) |
7.2.5. |
HSBC and Quantum Key Distribution (2) |
8. |
MATERIALS FOR QUANTUM TECHNOLOGY |
8.1. |
Chapter Overview |
8.2. |
Superconductors |
8.2.1. |
Overview of superconductors in quantum technology |
8.2.2. |
Critical temperature plays a key role in superconductor material choice for quantum technology |
8.2.3. |
Critical material chain considerations for superconducting quantum computing |
8.2.4. |
Overview of the superconductor value chain in quantum technology |
8.2.5. |
Room temperature superconductors - and why they won't necessarily unlock the quantum technology market |
8.2.6. |
Superconducting nanowire single photon detector (SNSPD) |
8.2.7. |
Superconducting nanowire single photon detectors (SNSPDs) |
8.2.8. |
SNSPD applications must value performance highly enough to justify the bulk/cost of cryogenics |
8.2.9. |
Research in scaling SNSPD arrays beyond kilopixel |
8.2.10. |
Advancements in superconducting materials drives SNSPD development |
8.2.11. |
Comparison of commercial SNSPD players |
8.2.12. |
SWOT analysis: superconducting nanowire single photon detectors (SNSPDs) |
8.2.13. |
Kinetic inductance detector (KID) and transition edge sensor (TES) |
8.2.14. |
Kinetic inductance detectors (KIDs) |
8.2.15. |
Transition edge sensors (TES) |
8.2.16. |
How have SNSPDs gained traction while KIDs and TESs remain in research? |
8.2.17. |
Comparison of single photon detector technology |
8.3. |
Photonics, Silicon Photonics and Optical Components |
8.3.1. |
Overview of photonics, silicon photonics and optics in quantum technology |
8.3.2. |
Overview of material considerations for photonic integrated circuits (PICs) |
8.3.3. |
Photonic computing demands better electro-optical materials, alternatives to standard silicon and warmer superconductors than niobium (1) |
8.3.4. |
Photonic computing demands better electro-optical materials, alternatives to standard silicon and warmer superconductors than niobium (2) |
8.3.5. |
VCSELs enable miniaturization of quantum sensors and components |
8.3.6. |
Alkali azides used to overcome high-vacuum fabrication requirements of vapor cells for quantum sensing |
8.3.7. |
An opportunity for better optical fiber and quantum interconnects materials |
8.3.8. |
Semiconductor single photon detectors |
8.4. |
Nanomaterials (Graphene, CNTs, Diamond and MOFs) |
8.4.1. |
Introduction to 2D Materials for Quantum Technology |
8.4.2. |
Interest in TMD based quantum dots as single photon sources for quantum networking |
8.4.3. |
Introduction to graphene membranes |
8.4.4. |
Research interest in graphene membranes for RAM memory in quantum computers |
8.4.5. |
2.5D Materials pitches as solution to quantum information storage |
8.4.6. |
Single Walled Carbon Nanotubes for Quantum Computers and C12 |
8.4.7. |
Long term potential in the quantum materials market for Boron Nitride Nanotubes (BNNT) |
8.4.8. |
Snapshot of market readiness levels of CNT applications - quantum only at PoC stage |
8.4.9. |
Overview of diamond in quantum technology |
8.4.10. |
Material advantages and disadvantages of diamond for quantum applications |
8.4.11. |
Element Six are leaders in scaling up manufacturing of diamond for quantum applications using chemical vapor deposition (CVD) |
8.4.12. |
Overview of the synthetic diamond value chain in quantum technology |
8.4.13. |
Chromophore integrated MOFs can stabilize qubits at room temperature for quantum computing |
8.4.14. |
Conclusions and Outlook: Summary of material opportunities in quantum technology |
9. |
COMPANY PROFILES |
9.1. |
Aegiq |
9.2. |
BlueFors (Helium) |
9.3. |
Classiq |
9.4. |
D-Wave |
9.5. |
Diatope |
9.6. |
Diraq |
9.7. |
Element Six (Quantum Technologies) |
9.8. |
Hitachi Cambridge Laboratory (HCL) |
9.9. |
IBM (Quantum Computing) |
9.10. |
Infineon (Quantum Algorithms) |
9.11. |
Infleqtion (previously Cold Quanta) |
9.12. |
IonQ |
9.13. |
nu quantum |
9.14. |
ORCA Computing |
9.15. |
Powerlase Ltd |
9.16. |
PsiQuantum |
9.17. |
Q.ANT |
9.18. |
Quantinuum |
9.19. |
QuantrolOx |
9.20. |
Quantum Brilliance |
9.21. |
Quantum Computing Inc |
9.22. |
Quantum Motion |
9.23. |
Quantum XChange |
9.24. |
QuEra |
9.25. |
QuiX Quantum |
9.26. |
River Lane |
9.27. |
Schrödinger Update: Batteries and Materials Informatics |
9.28. |
SEEQC |
9.29. |
SemiWise |
9.30. |
Senko Advance Components Ltd |
9.31. |
Single Quantum |
9.32. |
Siquance |
9.33. |
VTT Manufacturing (Quantum Technologies) |
9.34. |
XeedQ |