Nefarious Trading Est 2021
⏱ 15 min read Research · Vol. 01 No. 39 · June 2026
IBM#1 · 9.2 · WINNER ▲ GOOGL#2 · 9.0 · WINNER ▲ AMZN#3 · 8.6 · WINNER ▲ QNTNEW · QUANTINUUM IPO'd JUN 4 ▲ IONQBEST PURE-PLAY ▲ QUBT#15 · 1.0 · AVOID/MEME ▼ IBM#1 · 9.2 · WINNER ▲ GOOGL#2 · 9.0 · WINNER ▲ AMZN#3 · 8.6 · WINNER ▲ QNTNEW · QUANTINUUM IPO'd JUN 4 ▲ IONQBEST PURE-PLAY ▲ QUBT#15 · 1.0 · AVOID/MEME ▼
Special Report · The Quantum Power Rankings · Every Public Play, Ranked
The Quantum
Power Rankings
15 public names · giants vs pure-plays vs memes
3
real winners (GOOGL · IBM · AMZN) · everything else is a sleeve or a trap

Quantum is real science wrapped in a speculative bubble. The whole public pure-play group earns under ~$250M combined against tens of billions in market cap. So you own the breakthroughs through the giants — and treat every pure-play as a small, high-variance lottery sleeve.

TL;DR — Your instinct is right: GOOGL, IBM and AMZN are the winners. They combine the only three things no pure-play has — infinite self-funded budgets (quantum is a rounding error against tens of billions of net income), genuine verified breakthroughs (Google's Willow error correction, IBM's fault-tolerant 2029 roadmap, Amazon's Ocelot), and diversification (you get the science with zero quantum risk to the P&L). The refinement: IBM edges Google for #1 — the most complete program, backed by ~$10.6B net income. Below the giants sit two more cash-rich optionality plays (MSFT, topological but scientifically disputed; NVDA, the modality-agnostic "arms dealer"), then the real pure-plays: QNT (Quantinuum — the trapped-ion tech leader, just IPO'd June 4) and IONQ (best-capitalized) are the only two defensible ones. Everything below — RGTI, QBTS, INTC, INFQ — is a high-risk sleeve. And three "quantum" tickers aren't quantum computers at all: ARQQ and LAES sell quantum-security software/chips, and QUBT is a ~$2B cap on ~$24K of organic revenue with two short-seller fraud reports against it. Core-satellite: own the giants, size the pure-plays tiny, avoid the memes.
15 public names, fact-checked against filings, the Quantinuum S-1, and primary science coverage. Short-seller claims are attributed as allegations, not findings. Pre-commercial, 100–1000× sales, dilution-heavy sector — analysis, not advice.
§ The Verdict

Three winners, and it's not close. The giants win the way the house wins — by never having to be right on time.

IBM #1
Most complete program · 9.2
GOOGL #2
Strongest verified science · 9.0
AMZN #3
Owns distribution (Braket) · 8.6

The giants win because they combine three things no pure-play can: (1) infinite, self-funded budgets — the entire quantum program is a rounding error against tens of billions in net income, so they can lose the timeline race indefinitely without dilution or bankruptcy; (2) genuine, independently verified breakthroughs — Google's Willow showed "below-threshold" error correction (the single most important result in the field), IBM has the most concrete roadmap to a fault-tolerant machine (Starling, 2029), and Amazon's Ocelot cuts error-correction overhead; and (3) diversification — quantum is pure optionality, not a survival bet. You buy the science with the downside protected by a giant, profitable business. IBM edges Google because it's the only mega-cap whose program is large relative to peers yet still backstopped by ~$10.6B net income — the most quantum exposure per dollar of downside protection.

In Plain English

Quantum computers are still years from making real money, and nobody knows whose technology wins. The giants (IBM, Google, Amazon) can fund the race forever out of pocket change and already have the best science — so you get the upside without betting the farm. The tiny pure-plays have to keep selling stock just to survive.

§ The Modality Cheat-Sheet

First, the qubit zoo. Six ways to build a quantum computer — and who's betting on each.

ApproachHow it worksPublic playersRead
SuperconductingSupercooled circuits near absolute zeroIBM, Google, RGTI, IQM*Most mature, scaling fastest
Trapped-ionIndividual ions held by lasers/fieldsQNT, IONQHighest fidelity / quality
Neutral-atomAtoms in optical "tweezers"INFQ, QuEra*, Atom*, Pasqal*Fast-rising; logical-qubit leaders
TopologicalExotic Majorana states (more stable, in theory)MSFTHighest ceiling — scientifically disputed
PhotonicLight/photons, room-temperatureQUBT, PsiQuantum*, XanaduEarly; PsiQuantum is the whale
AnnealingEnergy-minimization (NOT universal)QBTSOptimization only — can't run Shor's
Silicon-spinElectron spins on a standard CMOS lineINTCManufacturable but earliest-stage
Software / hybridNo qubits — orchestrates GPUs + QPUsNVDAThe "arms dealer," wins either way

* = private or just-listed via SPAC (see §The Privates). The point: nobody knows which modality wins — which is itself the strongest argument for the diversified giants and Nvidia's modality-agnostic position.

In Plain English

There are several competing recipes for building a quantum computer (supercooled chips, trapped ions, atoms held by lasers, etc.). Each has different companies behind it, and it's genuinely unknown which one will win — so betting on a single recipe is risky, and owning the giants (who hedge across approaches) is safer.

§ The Full Rankings

All 15 public quantum plays, ranked. Risk-adjusted — best business to worst, not biggest pop.

#TickerCompanyScoreTierCapThe one-liner
1IBMIBM9.2Winner~$244BMost complete program: Heron + System Two today, fault-tolerant Starling by 2029, ~$10.6B net income to self-fund it.
2GOOGLAlphabet9.0Winner~$4.2TWillow's below-threshold error correction is the most important verified result in the field. Buy the science, zero P&L risk.
3AMZNAmazon8.6Winner~$2.6TOcelot cuts error overhead; Braket rents every rival's hardware. AWS wins distribution whoever wins the qubit war.
4MSFTMicrosoft7.6Giant~$2.7THighest-ceiling architecture (topological) + Azure Quantum reselling all modalities — but the Majorana science is disputed.
5NVDANvidia7.4Giant~$4.7TThe arms dealer: CUDA-Q + NVQLink are the default classical layer for every QPU. Real moat, quantum financially negligible.
6QNTQuantinuum7.0Pure-play ★~$14BNEW — IPO'd Jun 4. The trapped-ion tech leader (Helios, ~48 logical qubits, best fidelity) — but ~450× sales on $31M revenue.
7IONQIonQ6.6Pure-play~$20BBest-capitalized pure-play & revenue leader (~$187M TTM, +202%, ~$3.1B cash). If you own one, own this. Still loses ~$510M/yr.
8HONHoneywell6.4Diversified~$144BProfitable industrial + a Quantinuum stake — but now redundant: holders got no QNT shares, so buy QNT directly.
9RGTIRigetti4.3Speculative~$6.6BDebt-free, ~$569M cash, 84-qubit Ankaa-3 — but ~$10M revenue (~650× sales) and ~$80M/yr burn. Superconducting NISQ bet.
10QBTSD-Wave4.0Speculative~$8.6BAnnealing pioneer, ~$588M cash — but Q1 revenue collapsed 81% to $2.9M, >600× sales. A story stock whose story is shrinking.
11INTCIntel3.8Speculative~$657BCMOS-native silicon spin is a real long-term moat, but stuck at 12 research qubits inside a turnaround that cut R&D ~19%.
12INFQInfleqtion2.8Lottery~$3.0BGood neutral-atom tech (99.73% fidelity) + ~$569M cash — but the Initial Customer was 70.7% of FY25 revenue and PAUSED.
13ARQQArqit2.2Not a QC~$440MNot a quantum computer — quantum-safe encryption with sub-$1M revenue, a WSJ overstated-projections history, 25:1 reverse split.
14LAESSEALSQ2.0Not a QC~smallNot a quantum computer — a post-quantum-cryptography chipmaker riding the "quantum" label; heavily diluted meme micro-cap.
15QUBTQuantum Computing Inc.1.0Avoid / Meme~$2.0B~$2B cap on ~$24K organic revenue, "compute-from-noise" with no verified benchmark, two short-seller fraud reports + a class action.
★ The big update — a new buyable leader

Quantinuum (QNT) — the Honeywell/Cambridge-Quantum trapped-ion leader — completed its Nasdaq IPO on June 4, 2026 at $60/share (~$14B valuation, ~$1.68B raised). Its Helios system demonstrated ~48 error-corrected logical qubits with best-in-class fidelity — arguably the strongest pure-play technology. The catch: ~$31M revenue means it trades at ~450× sales, and it lost ~$192.6M last year. The trapped-ion crown is now buyable — at a venture price.

In Plain English

Top three: the giants. Then two more giants with quantum side-projects (Microsoft, Nvidia). Then the only two pure quantum companies worth owning — Quantinuum (best tech, just went public) and IonQ (most cash). Below that it's lottery tickets, and the bottom three aren't even real quantum computers or are flagged for fraud.

§ The Giants With Asterisks

Microsoft and Nvidia: real, but read the fine print. One has disputed science; the other has no quantum revenue at all.

MSFT · topological
The highest ceiling — and the loudest skeptics
Microsoft's Majorana 1 (Feb 2025) and Majorana 2 (June 2026) chase topological qubits — the most stable architecture if it works. But the science is actively disputed: the Nature paper's own editors noted it "did not represent evidence" for the key effect, and named physicists called the data "incredibly unconvincing." Treat MSFT as free optionality on a $282B-revenue base — do not buy it for the qubits.
NVDA · the arms dealer
Doesn't build a quantum computer — sells the picks
Nvidia makes no qubits. It sells the classical layer: CUDA-Q software + NVQLink interconnect, making it the default co-processor for every QPU, plus NVentures stakes across PsiQuantum, Quantinuum, QuEra and Alice & Bob. (Note the whiplash: Jensen said "~20 years" at CES Jan 2025, crashing the sector ~40%, then U-turned to "inflection point" by mid-2025.) A real moat — but quantum is financially negligible to a $216B/yr company.
In Plain English

Microsoft is chasing the most ambitious type of qubit, but many physicists doubt its headline results — so it's a "maybe," not proof. Nvidia isn't building a quantum computer at all; it sells the supporting hardware/software that every quantum company uses, so it wins no matter who else does — but quantum is a tiny part of its business.

§ The Privates & The IPO Wave

The best names were unbuyable — until 2026. The window cracked open and the leaders walked through it.

The "private quantum" shopping list is emptying fast. What just became (or is about to become) tradable:

NameModalityStatus (June 2026)
QuantinuumTrapped-ionPUBLIC — IPO'd as QNT, Jun 4 (~$14B)
XanaduPhotonicPUBLIC — SPAC, Mar 27 (~$3.6B)
PasqalNeutral-atomConverting — SPAC, ~$2.6B, 2H26
IQMSuperconductingConverting — SPAC "IQMX," ~$1.8B
PsiQuantumPhotonicPRIVATE — the whale (~$7B, BlackRock/Nvidia/sovereigns)
QuEraNeutral-atomPRIVATE — 96 logical qubits (Nature, Jan '26); Google/SoftBank
Atom ComputingNeutral-atomPRIVATE — Microsoft's partner
Alice & BobCat-qubitPRIVATE — efficiency story, Nvidia-backed

Two things to take from this. First, the unbuyable-but-watch list has narrowed to PsiQuantum (the $7B photonic whale — note: not the "$30B" some posts claim), QuEra (the logical-qubit science leader), and Atom/Alice & Bob. Second, Nvidia's venture arm is invested across PsiQuantum, QuEra and Alice & Bob — a useful tell on which architectures the picks-and-shovels king is hedging. But respect the warning: a SPAC wave in pre-revenue deep-tech is the exact 2021 setup that cratered the first quantum-SPAC class (IonQ/Rigetti/D-Wave) before they recovered. Caveat emptor on the new listings.

In Plain English

Until recently the most advanced quantum companies were private. In 2026 a bunch went public (Quantinuum, Xanadu) or are about to (Pasqal, IQM). That's exciting but also a classic late-cycle warning sign — the last time pre-revenue quantum companies rushed to list (2021), the stocks crashed afterward. The biggest one you still can't buy is PsiQuantum.

§ The Traps

Three "quantum" tickers that aren't quantum computers. The distinction most retail misses — and the one outright meme.

⚠ Quantum SECURITY ≠ Quantum COMPUTING

ARQQ (Arqit) and LAES (SEALSQ) do not build quantum computers. They sell post-quantum cryptography — software/chips that protect data against a future quantum computer. Real category, totally different business. Arqit has a WSJ-documented history of overstated projections (it once implied ~$660M of 2025 revenue; actual was ~$530K) and did a 25:1 reverse split. Both are heavily-diluted meme micro-caps riding the "quantum" label.

QUBT (Quantum Computing Inc.) is the bottom of the list. A ~$2B market cap rests on ~$24K of organic revenue and an unproven "compute-from-noise" claim with no verified quantum-advantage benchmark. Two activist short-sellers (Iceberg, Capybara) published reports alleging "perma-scam" and "rampant fraud," and a securities class action followed. These are allegations, not proven findings — the company disputes them, and it is cash-rich (~$1.4B, raised via dilution) rather than broke. But the risk/reward is the worst in the group.

In Plain English

Watch the label. Arqit and SEALSQ sell security products to defend against quantum computers — they don't make them. And QUBT, despite a ~$2B value, earns almost nothing and has been accused of fraud by short-sellers (unproven, but a giant red flag). None of these belong in a "quantum computing" basket.

§ The Risks

What sinks the whole complex. The thing that makes it exciting — scarcity of proof — is the thing that reverses hardest.

Timeline risk — useful fault-tolerance is years-to-a-decade+ away (Jensen's midpoint: ~20 yrs)
Valuation risk — pure-plays at 100–1000× sales (QBTS >600×, RGTI ~650×, QNT ~450×)
Dilution — every pure-play funds the march to fault tolerance by issuing stock. Repeatedly.
Modality risk — a single-architecture bet is a total loss if its qubit tech loses the race
Credibility risk — headline claims outrun peer review (Majorana disputed; QUBT flagged)
Misattribution — overpaying MSFT/NVDA/INTC/HON "for quantum" that's financially immaterial

This is a barbell: real, accelerating science at the top (Willow, IBM's roadmap, QuEra's 96 logical qubits, Quantinuum's 48) sitting on a pre-commercial industry where the entire public pure-play group generates well under $250M of combined revenue. A single sentiment shift — a rate move, a Jensen comment, a missed milestone — can halve these names, as both the Jan 2025 crash and the post-Quantinuum-IPO sector selloff showed.

In Plain English

Quantum stocks are priced for a future that may be a decade away, they constantly dilute shareholders, and any bad news can cut them in half. The science is genuinely improving — but the stocks have run far ahead of the business, which is exactly when they're most fragile.

§ My Take

John's read. Own the breakthroughs through the giants. Trade the pure-plays like the lottery tickets they are.

My Take — Johnny Li
  • You nailed the winners. GOOGL, IBM, AMZN — the giants win because quantum is free optionality bolted onto businesses that print money. They can be wrong on timing for a decade and not care. If I want quantum in a long-term portfolio, it's here. My #1 is IBM — the most program per dollar of downside protection.
  • The structure is core-satellite, not a basket of moonshots. Own the breakthroughs through the giants (downside protected), and treat every pure-play as a small, sized-to-lose sleeve where total loss is a live outcome and dilution is structural.
  • If you must own a pure-play, it's QNT or IONQ — full stop. Quantinuum has the best technology (now finally buyable); IonQ has the most cash and revenue. Both are venture bets at ~450×/110× sales. Everything below them (RGTI, QBTS, INTC, INFQ) is a smaller, riskier version of the same bet.
  • Know what you're buying. ARQQ and LAES are security plays, not computers. QUBT is a ~$2B cap on ~$24K of revenue with fraud allegations attached — I wouldn't touch it. And don't overpay MSFT/NVDA "for quantum" — that exposure is a rounding error; you're buying Azure and AI.
  • Respect the cycle. The 2026 IPO/SPAC wave (Quantinuum, Xanadu, Pasqal, IQM) is both the opportunity and the warning — it rhymes with the 2021 quantum-SPAC bust. Be decisive: giants as the core, QNT/IONQ as tiny satellites, the memes avoided entirely. And watch the one number that matters — the day "verified logical qubits" stalls, the whole complex de-rates together.

Want the live quantum scorecard + the milestone that re-rates the whole group?

Join the Discord to find out! →
Comment "quantum" · discord.gg/nfrs · @Nefarioustrading
Nefarious Trading
Equity research and trading commentary — AI infrastructure, photonics, enterprise software, power semiconductors.
AuthorJohnny Li
Sources & Method
14 public names + the private landscape researched and independently fact-checked (~June 25, 2026). Winners: IBM (Heron/System Two, Starling 2029 roadmap, ~$10.6B net income); Alphabet (Willow 105-qubit, below-threshold error correction, Dec 2024; ~$61B R&D); Amazon (Ocelot cat-qubit, Feb 2025; AWS Braket). MSFT: Majorana 1 (Feb 19, 2025) & Majorana 2 (June 2026) — topological claims contested in Nature/Science with named physicist critics; quantum immaterial to ~$282B revenue. NVDA: no qubits — CUDA-Q, NVQLink (Oct 2025), NVAQC (Mar 2025), NVentures stakes (PsiQuantum/Quantinuum/QuEra/Alice & Bob); Huang's CES Jan 2025 "~20-year" comment and mid-2025 reversal. QNT (Quantinuum): Nasdaq IPO June 4, 2026, $60/share, ~$14B, ~$1.68B raised; FY2025 revenue ~$31M (~450× sales), net loss ~$192.6M; Helios ~48 logical qubits; Honeywell + Cambridge Quantum retain ~82%. IONQ: ~$20B cap, ~$187M TTM rev (+202%), ~$3.1B cash, FY25 net loss ~$510M, trapped-ion. HON: ~$144B, Quantinuum stake ~6–7% of cap, holders received no QNT shares (now redundant). RGTI (~$10M rev, ~650× sales), QBTS (Q1 rev −81% to $2.9M, >600× sales), INTC (Tunnel Falls 12-qubit silicon spin; R&D cut ~19%), INFQ (neutral-atom; Initial Customer 70.7% of FY25 rev, paused). ARQQ = quantum-safe encryption (sub-$1M revenue; WSJ flagged ~$660M-implied vs ~$530K actual; 25:1 reverse split) — NOT a quantum computer. LAES (SEALSQ) = post-quantum-cryptography chips — NOT a quantum computer. QUBT = ~$2B cap on ~$682K FY25 (~$24K organic) revenue, ~$1.4B cash; Iceberg (Nov 2024) and Capybara (Jan 2025) short reports allege "perma-scam"/"fraud" (unproven; company disputes) + securities class action. Privates: PsiQuantum (~$7B, $1B Series E Sept 2025 — not "$30B"); QuEra (96 logical qubits, Nature Jan 2026); Atom Computing; Alice & Bob; Xanadu (public via SPAC Mar 2026, ~$3.6B); Pasqal & IQM (SPACs converting 2026). Scores are a Nefarious composite of program credibility, balance sheet, traction, and risk — not a quantitative model. Market caps approximate, as of ~June 25, 2026.
One trader's view — do your own research; the author's positions are not disclosed and nothing here is a recommendation to buy or sell any security. Quantum computing is an early, pre-commercial, highly speculative field; useful, commercially material fault-tolerant quantum is likely years to a decade-plus away. The pure-play stocks trade at extreme revenue multiples (100–1000× sales), are deeply unprofitable, fund themselves through ongoing shareholder dilution, and can move 30–45% on a single headline. For the giants (GOOGL, IBM, AMZN, MSFT, NVDA, INTC, HON), quantum is financially immaterial — those stocks move on AI/cloud/foundry/industrials, not qubits; buying them "for quantum" is misframed. Short-seller allegations against QUBT (and credibility concerns around ARQQ) are described as allegations/claims, not adjudicated findings; the companies dispute them. Roadmap dates, logical-qubit claims, and scientific milestones are projections or company statements, some actively disputed by physicists. The 2026 IPO/SPAC wave echoes the 2021 quantum-SPAC bust. Rankings, tiers and scores are the author's opinion, not price targets. Figures approximate, as of late June 2026. © 2026 Nefarious Trading.