Skip to content
QubitWire
Skip to rankings

The quantum research index.

QRank

Quantum, in perspective.

Explore documented maturity within each quantum sector. QRank is an editorial research assessment, not a performance benchmark or stock rating.

Explore rankings
organizations listed
335
profiles assessed
77
sectors
8
Score edition 10 material evidence updates in the past 7 days →
SECTOR INTELLIGENCE

Security & cryptography

Who is delivering a credible route to quantum-safe security?

3 assessed in security & cryptography · Edition 23 Sept 2026 · Method 1.0

A field guide to this sectorKnow what to compare

Choose the security layer before the supplier

Post-quantum cryptography (PQC) uses mathematical algorithms on conventional computers. QKD uses quantum signals to distribute keys. Quantum random-number generation supplies randomness; it does not replace either.

PQC
Cryptography designed to resist attacks by quantum computers.
Crypto-agility
The ability to replace or update cryptographic mechanisms.
NIST: post-quantum cryptography standards

Three questions worth asking

  1. Which exact algorithm, implementation and version is supported?
  2. Is a claim about standards alignment, validation or a completed certification?
  3. How are inventory, interoperability and migration handled?
QubitWire’s editorial checklist. See company evidence for specific claims.
Four checks before comparing a hardware claim

Use these questions when reading a company’s sources. They explain comparisons; they do not assign or change a QRank score. Every numerical example below is synthetic.

Best device or typical device?

What population does the headline number describe?

A selected result and a median answer different questions. Compare the same statistic, selection rule, measurement method and population before ordering two devices.

Synthetic sample: five coherence times are 40, 50, 60, 70 and 100 microseconds. The best is 100; the median is 60. Both describe this sample, but neither establishes the performance of every qubit or a useful circuit.

Ask for: Find the sample size, tested device set, excluded measurements, distribution and calibration date. If only the best value is disclosed, leave the median unknown.

NIST: defining mean, median and other measures of location

Link to this check
Tested alone or operating together?

Were nearby qubits active during the measurement?

Operating a gate alone and operating it alongside other gates can expose different unwanted interactions. Simultaneous benchmarking explicitly tests an operating context that an isolated measurement does not establish.

Synthetic comparison: an error estimate rises from 0.2% in isolation to 0.8% with neighboring operations active. That is a 0.6 percentage-point change, or four times the original estimate. Without the method and uncertainty, those two numbers do not diagnose the cause.

Ask for: Find the active qubit set, simultaneous operations, benchmark protocol, uncertainty and calibration window. Do not compare an isolated best case with a simultaneous average as though they were the same test.

Gambetta et al.: individual and simultaneous randomized benchmarking

Link to this check
Error per gate, per cycle or per task?

What exactly counts as one opportunity for error?

A physical-gate error, a logical-cycle error and an application failure rate use different units and protocols. Keep the operation, code and decoding conditions with the result. A smaller percentage with a different denominator does not settle a comparison.

Synthetic classical event model: if ten independent operations each have a 1% chance of a flagged failure, the chance of at least one flag is 1 − 0.99¹⁰, about 9.56%. This is not a conversion from quantum gate infidelity to circuit failure: coherent errors, correlations and cancellation can break that interpretation.

Ask for: Find the error definition, benchmark, number of repetitions and confidence interval. For logical results, also find code distance, cycle definition, decoding method and any discarded trials.

Magesan et al.: the assumptions of interleaved gate benchmarking

Link to this check
Fast operation or fast complete job?

Where does the reported stopwatch start and stop?

Circuit execution is one part of a complete experiment. Preparing the job, waiting for access, repeating measurements and processing the output can each take time. Device usage and elapsed time are also different accounting quantities.

Synthetic job: 1,000 repetitions of a 50-microsecond gate sequence contribute 0.05 seconds. Add 0.25 seconds for readout/reset, 2 seconds of preparation, 10 seconds waiting and 1 second processing: the complete toy job takes 13.3 seconds.

Ask for: Find included stages, repetitions, error-mitigation work, queue treatment and output-quality requirement. Compare equivalent completed tasks before interpreting a speedup.

IBM Quantum: workload usage and execution-time components

Change the assumptions in the experiment-time lesson →

Link to this check

Background sources checked 2026-10-16. The examples are QubitWire teaching calculations, not results from the cited experiments.

What matters in this sectorView scoring weights

PQC, QKD and random-number generation are not interchangeable. Certifications apply only to their specified products and versions.

40%Capability

Standards alignment, implementation assurance and explicit security assumptions.

25%Delivery

Available supported products, migration features and documentation.

20%Use in practice

Named customer deployments or independently documented trials.

15%Integration

Interoperability with existing networks, applications and security infrastructure.

Search companies, technologies or applications. Arrow keys explore suggestions. Escape keeps your search and closes suggestions.
Rankings · 3
3 assessed organizations. Showing 1–3.

Equal scores share a position within their sector.

3 assessed / 27 listed

Directory inclusion is separate from assessment.

Rank1
Post-quantum cryptography libraries and hardware IPUnited Kingdom

Provides cryptographic building blocks that developers integrate into applications and devices to prepare for quantum-computer attacks. PQC runs on conventional computing hardware and does not require a quantum network.

Library evaluationResearch reviewed · research refresh due5 linked sources
Capability 3 / 4
Delivery 4 / 4
Use in practice 2 / 4
Integration 3 / 4

Limitation: NIST certificate 4800 is an interim Level 1 validation for PQCryptoLib 1.0.0 in specified configurations. It does not certify every PQShield version, every post-quantum algorithm or an entire customer deployment; newer CAVP entries and submissions are distinct.

Full company research →
76.3/ 100
External corroboration

External sources support at least half of the weighted assessment. They can include collaborators; this does not imply independent replication or technical superiority.

5 assessment sourcesAssessment reviewed Assessment refresh due
Why this position?

This score reflects documented maturity using the security & cryptography weighting.

Capability 40% weight
3 / 4 · 30 points
Delivery 25% weight
4 / 4 · 25 points
Use in practice 20% weight
2 / 4 · 10 points
Integration 15% weight
3 / 4 · 11.25 points

Strength: Verifiable module-level assurance and technical integration products, with external platform support.

Limitation: NIST certificate 4800 is an interim Level 1 validation for PQCryptoLib 1.0.0 in specified configurations. It does not certify every PQShield version, every post-quantum algorithm or an entire customer deployment; newer CAVP entries and submissions are distinct.

External corroboration · Assessment reviewed
Score edition · Method 1.0. Editorial opinion within this sector, not a probability or performance benchmark.

Read the assessment evidence →Full company research →
Rank2(tie)
Quantum key distribution and quantum random-number generationSwitzerland

Supplies equipment for distributing cryptographic keys and components for generating randomness. ID Quantique operates as an IonQ subsidiary following the May 2025 controlling-stake acquisition.

Commercial security productsResearch reviewed · research refresh due5 linked sources
Capability 2 / 4
Delivery 3 / 4
Use in practice 3 / 4
Integration 3 / 4

Limitation: QKD distributes keys and QRNG supplies randomness; neither alone establishes complete application security. The Romanian deployment's 1,500 km is aggregate network span across links, not a single unrepeated QKD transmission distance.

Full company research →
65.0/ 100
External corroboration

External sources support at least half of the weighted assessment. They can include collaborators; this does not imply independent replication or technical superiority.

5 assessment sourcesAssessment reviewed Assessment refresh due
Why this position?

This score reflects documented maturity using the security & cryptography weighting.

Capability 40% weight
2 / 4 · 20 points
Delivery 25% weight
3 / 4 · 18.75 points
Use in practice 20% weight
3 / 4 · 15 points
Integration 15% weight
3 / 4 · 11.25 points

Strength: Commercial QKD and QRNG product families with a named national-network deployment and institutional corroboration.

Limitation: QKD distributes keys and QRNG supplies randomness; neither alone establishes complete application security. The Romanian deployment's 1,500 km is aggregate network span across links, not a single unrepeated QKD transmission distance.

External corroboration · Assessment reviewed
Score edition · Method 1.0. Editorial opinion within this sector, not a probability or performance benchmark.

Read the assessment evidence →Full company research →
Rank2(tie)
Post-quantum migration and cryptographic orchestrationUnited States

QuProtect discovers the cryptography used by network connections, manages algorithm changes and produces a cryptographic inventory. It applies post-quantum algorithms in conventional software.

Commercial platform demoResearch reviewed · research refresh due3 linked sources
Capability 2 / 4
Delivery 3 / 4
Use in practice 3 / 4
Integration 3 / 4

Limitation: Bank pilot results do not establish bank-wide production adoption. The Army TRL-7 assessment is company-reported, and this review does not establish a QuProtect FIPS module certificate or independently audited performance claims.

Full company research →
65.0/ 100
External corroboration

External sources support at least half of the weighted assessment. They can include collaborators; this does not imply independent replication or technical superiority.

3 assessment sourcesAssessment reviewed Assessment refresh due
Why this position?

This score reflects documented maturity using the security & cryptography weighting.

Capability 40% weight
2 / 4 · 20 points
Delivery 25% weight
3 / 4 · 18.75 points
Use in practice 20% weight
3 / 4 · 15 points
Integration 15% weight
3 / 4 · 11.25 points

Strength: Named partner-confirmed pilots and a commercial crypto-agility platform focused on practical migration.

Limitation: Bank pilot results do not establish bank-wide production adoption. The Army TRL-7 assessment is company-reported, and this review does not establish a QuProtect FIPS module certificate or independently audited performance claims.

External corroboration · Assessment reviewed
Score edition · Method 1.0. Editorial opinion within this sector, not a probability or performance benchmark.

Read the assessment evidence →Full company research →

A position should be explainable.

Scores express the QubitWire team’s opinions about documented maturity, using sector-specific weights. They are research-informed judgments, not predictions or objective performance measurements.