Skip to content
QubitWire
Saved
Skip to rankings

The quantum research index.

QRank

See what each organization has demonstrated and compare its score with others in the same sector.

Editorial research assessment, not a performance benchmark or stock rating.

Explore rankings
392 listed · 192 research profiles · 77 currently assessedWhat these counts mean

Whole-directory coverage across 8 sectors. The results below follow your selected sector and filters.

Listed
Included in the directory. A listing is not a score or endorsement.
Research profile
A dedicated page with sources and context. It may still be unscored.
Currently assessed
A complete published assessment eligible for the current ranking under Method 1.0. Reviews older than 90 days are excluded.

These groups overlap: an assessed organization is also listed. Score edition .

About QRank

Quantum, in perspective.

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

5 material evidence updates in the past 7 days →
SECTOR INTELLIGENCE

Enabling technology

Who supplies the tools the quantum stack depends on?

22 assessed in enabling technology · Score edition 23 Sept 2026 · Method 1.0

Your question: Which organizations match enabling technology and my filters?

Search companies, technologies or applications. Arrow keys explore suggestions. Escape keeps your search and closes suggestions.
Rankings · 22
22 assessed organizations in enabling technology. Showing 1–12.
Rank1
Quantum control electronics and experiment orchestrationSwitzerland
92.5 /100 · editorial assessment

Provides the electronics and programming layer for operating quantum devices.

Quoted instruments with public manualsResearch brief reviewed · brief refresh dueEvidence list: 4 source pages
Capability 3 / 4
Delivery 4 / 4
Use in practice 4 / 4
Integration 4 / 4

Limitation: Control-system specifications do not establish the fidelity of a complete quantum processor. Published SHFQC experiments do not validate every specification of the newer SHFQC+ revision.

Full company research →
92.5/ 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.

4 assessment sourcesAssessment reviewed Assessment refresh due
Why this position? for Zurich Instruments

This score reflects documented maturity using the enabling technology weighting.

Capability 30% weight
3 / 4 · 22.5 points
Delivery 30% weight
4 / 4 · 30 points
Use in practice 25% weight
4 / 4 · 25 points
Integration 15% weight
4 / 4 · 15 points

Strength: Extensive operating resources and repeated, identifiable external research use.

Limitation: Control-system specifications do not establish the fidelity of a complete quantum processor. Published SHFQC experiments do not validate every specification of the newer SHFQC+ revision.

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 control, readout and calibrationIsrael
86.3 /100 · editorial assessment

OPX controllers coordinate the electrical signals, measurements and feedback needed to operate quantum experiments. The OPX1000 combines modular hardware with QUA programming and calibration tools; it is a control layer used with separately supplied quantum devices.

Read OPX1000 specificationsResearch brief reviewed · brief refresh dueEvidence list: 10 source pages
Capability 3 / 4
Delivery 4 / 4
Use in practice 3 / 4
Integration 4 / 4

Limitation: The Novera result is a vendor-reported system integration result, not a universal controller benchmark. The August 2026 silicon-dot study is a preprint and does not establish large-array performance.

Full company research →
86.3/ 100
Primarily organization-sourced

The assessment is primarily supported by organization-originated evidence. External evidence does not meet the published half-of-weight threshold.

5 assessment sourcesAssessment reviewed Assessment refresh dueWhat changed? →
Why this position? for Quantum Machines

This score reflects documented maturity using the enabling technology weighting.

Capability 30% weight
3 / 4 · 22.5 points
Delivery 30% weight
4 / 4 · 30 points
Use in practice 25% weight
3 / 4 · 18.75 points
Integration 15% weight
4 / 4 · 15 points

Strength: Evidence connects a documented product to full-chip control work and external laboratory research.

Limitation: The Novera fidelity result is vendor-reported for one nine-qubit platform and is not a universal controller benchmark; the August 2026 independent study is a preprint.

Primarily organization-sourced · 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)
Photon timing and time-tagging instrumentationGermany
86.3 /100 · editorial assessment

Records detection events and provides software for correlations, counting and synchronized acquisition.

Commercial instruments and maintained softwareResearch brief reviewed · brief refresh dueEvidence list: 4 source pages
Capability 3 / 4
Delivery 4 / 4
Use in practice 3 / 4
Integration 4 / 4

Limitation: Timestamp resolution and RMS timing precision differ. Detectors, signal thresholds and synchronization also constrain measurement accuracy.

Full company research →
86.3/ 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.

3 assessment sourcesAssessment reviewed Assessment refresh due
Why this position? for Swabian Instruments

This score reflects documented maturity using the enabling technology weighting.

Capability 30% weight
3 / 4 · 22.5 points
Delivery 30% weight
4 / 4 · 30 points
Use in practice 25% weight
3 / 4 · 18.75 points
Integration 15% weight
4 / 4 · 15 points

Strength: Independent experimental methods name Time Tagger Ultra, with reusable interfaces for acquisition and analysis.

Limitation: Digital timestamp resolution is not detector-system timing accuracy. Instrument use does not attribute the entire experiment’s performance to Swabian or establish computing advantage.

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 →
Rank4(tie)
Cryogenic infrastructure and measurement accessFinland
82.5 /100 · editorial assessment

Bluefors provides the cold environment and measurement infrastructure needed for many quantum-device experiments. Its systems cool samples using a helium-3/helium-4 mixture; its Lab service also offers access to installed equipment with operational support.

Explore shared lab accessResearch brief reviewed · brief refresh dueContext updated Evidence list: 10 source pages
Capability 3 / 4
Delivery 4 / 4
Use in practice 3 / 4
Integration 3 / 4

Limitation: The cooling figure applies to the named model, measurement location and temperature. Published cooldown time uses an empty system with standard experimental space and shields; wiring and active loads require a separate thermal budget. These specifications do not establish processor fidelity or computational performance.

Full company research →
82.5/ 100
Primarily organization-sourced

The assessment is primarily supported by organization-originated evidence. External evidence does not meet the published half-of-weight threshold.

5 assessment sourcesAssessment reviewed Assessment refresh dueWhat changed? →
Why this position? for Bluefors

This score reflects documented maturity using the enabling technology weighting.

Capability 30% weight
3 / 4 · 22.5 points
Delivery 30% weight
4 / 4 · 30 points
Use in practice 25% weight
3 / 4 · 18.75 points
Integration 15% weight
3 / 4 · 11.25 points

Strength: Evidence includes delivered cryogenic systems and university-confirmed access to a working shared-lab offering.

Limitation: Cooling specifications and nominal qubit capacity are infrastructure properties, not evidence of quantum processor accuracy or a demonstrated thousand-qubit computation.

Primarily organization-sourced · 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 →
Rank4(tie)
Modular quantum control and readoutNetherlands
82.5 /100 · editorial assessment

Qblox supplies the electronics and software that generate control pulses and acquire qubit measurements. Its Cluster has configurable modules, low-level Q1ASM programming and a Python scheduling layer, allowing a laboratory to assemble a stack around its experimental needs.

Explore the control stackResearch brief reviewed · brief refresh dueEvidence list: 8 source pages
Capability 3 / 4
Delivery 4 / 4
Use in practice 3 / 4
Integration 3 / 4

Limitation: Optical readout is a joint system experiment, with results that cannot be attributed to the controller alone. An 81% demolition-readout demonstration does not establish scalable fault-tolerant operation.

Full company research →
82.5/ 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.

4 assessment sourcesAssessment reviewed Assessment refresh dueWhat changed? →
Why this position? for Qblox

This score reflects documented maturity using the enabling technology weighting.

Capability 30% weight
3 / 4 · 22.5 points
Delivery 30% weight
4 / 4 · 30 points
Use in practice 25% weight
3 / 4 · 18.75 points
Integration 15% weight
3 / 4 · 11.25 points

Strength: A university independently confirms installed control electronics, while a QPU partner describes a completed optical-readout experiment.

Limitation: A modular architecture and future scaling goals do not establish fault-tolerant operation at scale; optical-readout results are a joint experiment and cannot be attributed to Qblox alone.

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 →
Rank4(tie)
Superconducting nanowire single-photon detectorsNetherlands
82.5 /100 · editorial assessment

Turns weak optical signals into timed photon-detection events for quantum optics and communication.

Configured detector systemsResearch brief reviewed · brief refresh dueEvidence list: 4 source pages
Capability 3 / 4
Delivery 4 / 4
Use in practice 3 / 4
Integration 3 / 4

Limitation: Detection efficiency, timing jitter and count-rate limits depend on configuration. The cited network result measures a complete experimental setup and does not independently validate every current detector specification.

Full company research →
82.5/ 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.

4 assessment sourcesAssessment reviewed Assessment refresh due
Why this position? for Single Quantum

This score reflects documented maturity using the enabling technology weighting.

Capability 30% weight
3 / 4 · 22.5 points
Delivery 30% weight
4 / 4 · 30 points
Use in practice 25% weight
3 / 4 · 18.75 points
Integration 15% weight
3 / 4 · 11.25 points

Strength: Documented detector systems, maintenance requirements and real network-experiment use.

Limitation: Detection efficiency, timing jitter and count-rate limits depend on configuration. The cited network result measures a complete experimental setup and does not independently validate every current detector specification.

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 →
Rank4(tie)
Tunable lasers and laser-control electronicsGermany
82.5 /100 · editorial assessment

Supplies optical sources and control electronics used in spectroscopy, atomic physics and quantum experiments.

Commercial laser systemsResearch brief reviewed · brief refresh dueEvidence list: 3 source pages
Capability 3 / 4
Delivery 4 / 4
Use in practice 3 / 4
Integration 3 / 4

Limitation: Laser availability does not establish qubit gate fidelity. Wavelength coverage, linewidth and stability depend on model and stabilization configuration.

Full company research →
82.5/ 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? for TOPTICA Photonics

This score reflects documented maturity using the enabling technology weighting.

Capability 30% weight
3 / 4 · 22.5 points
Delivery 30% weight
4 / 4 · 30 points
Use in practice 25% weight
3 / 4 · 18.75 points
Integration 15% weight
3 / 4 · 11.25 points

Strength: Current products and remote-control resources are complemented by independent experimental use.

Limitation: Laser performance depends on wavelength, configuration and stabilization. The cited optical experiment is evidence of instrument use, not of quantum-computer gate fidelity or commercial quantum advantage.

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 →
Rank8(tie)
Cryogen-free cryostats for photonic quantum circuits, ion traps, single-photon detectors and low-temperature device researchUnited Kingdom
75.0 /100 · editorial assessment

ICEoxford engineers cryogenic sample environments for quantum experiments. The offering covers photonic-circuit cooling and detector operation as well as ultra-high-vacuum environments for ion-trap and cold-atom research.

Cryostats and custom engineeringResearch brief reviewed · brief refresh dueEvidence list: 2 source pages
Capability 3 / 4
Delivery 3 / 4
Use in practice 3 / 4
Integration 3 / 4

Limitation: The Bristol account is supplier-written. Cooling figures describe particular configurations, and added wiring or optical heat loads can change achievable temperature.

Full company research →
75.0/ 100
Primarily organization-sourced

The assessment is primarily supported by organization-originated evidence. External evidence does not meet the published half-of-weight threshold.

2 assessment sourcesAssessment reviewed Assessment refresh due
Why this position? for ICEoxford

This score reflects documented maturity using the enabling technology weighting.

Capability 30% weight
3 / 4 · 22.5 points
Delivery 30% weight
3 / 4 · 22.5 points
Use in practice 25% weight
3 / 4 · 18.75 points
Integration 15% weight
3 / 4 · 11.25 points

Strength: A named application with thermal design details and a product range with explicit optical, electrical and controller interfaces.

Limitation: The Bristol account is supplier-written. Cooling figures describe particular configurations, and added wiring or optical heat loads can change achievable temperature.

Primarily organization-sourced · 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 →
Rank8(tie)
Silicon-nitride photonic foundry services, quantum-processor PICs, integrated laser control and quantum-device module engineeringNetherlands
75.0 /100 · editorial assessment

LioniX builds the photonic integrated circuits and modules on which quantum-system developers implement optical functions. Services span shared fabrication runs, custom design, fabrication and system integration.

MPW fabrication and module servicesResearch brief reviewed · brief refresh dueEvidence list: 3 source pages
Capability 3 / 4
Delivery 3 / 4
Use in practice 3 / 4
Integration 3 / 4

Limitation: The cited processor figures and sales history are supplier accounts. Photonic mode count and transformation fidelity do not by themselves establish computational advantage or fault tolerance.

Full company research →
75.0/ 100
Primarily organization-sourced

The assessment is primarily supported by organization-originated evidence. External evidence does not meet the published half-of-weight threshold.

3 assessment sourcesAssessment reviewed Assessment refresh due
Why this position? for LioniX International

This score reflects documented maturity using the enabling technology weighting.

Capability 30% weight
3 / 4 · 22.5 points
Delivery 30% weight
3 / 4 · 22.5 points
Use in practice 25% weight
3 / 4 · 18.75 points
Integration 15% weight
3 / 4 · 11.25 points

Strength: A quantum-specific fabrication and packaging workflow with identified commercial processor use.

Limitation: The cited processor figures and sales history are supplier accounts. Photonic mode count and transformation fidelity do not by themselves establish computational advantage or fault tolerance.

Primarily organization-sourced · 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 →
Rank8(tie)
Photonic quantum-chip packaging, fibre-array attachment, electrical interconnect assembly and scalable module manufacturingNetherlands
75.0 /100 · editorial assessment

PHIX turns bare quantum photonic chips into modules that can connect to an experimental or commercial system. Its offering covers prototype packages, scalable manufacturing and contract assembly.

Prototype, volume and contract packagingResearch brief reviewed · brief refresh dueEvidence list: 3 source pages
Capability 3 / 4
Delivery 3 / 4
Use in practice 3 / 4
Integration 3 / 4

Limitation: Historical module examples do not establish current maximum mode counts. Qmode and QuScale targets describe development work, and packaging alone does not prove quantum computational advantage.

Full company research →
75.0/ 100
Primarily organization-sourced

The assessment is primarily supported by organization-originated evidence. External evidence does not meet the published half-of-weight threshold.

3 assessment sourcesAssessment reviewed Assessment refresh due
Why this position? for PHIX Photonics Assembly

This score reflects documented maturity using the enabling technology weighting.

Capability 30% weight
3 / 4 · 22.5 points
Delivery 30% weight
3 / 4 · 22.5 points
Use in practice 25% weight
3 / 4 · 18.75 points
Integration 15% weight
3 / 4 · 11.25 points

Strength: A concrete customer module with optical, electrical and thermal packaging details.

Limitation: Historical module examples do not establish current maximum mode counts. Qmode and QuScale targets describe development work, and packaging alone does not prove quantum computational advantage.

Primarily organization-sourced · 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 →
Rank8(tie)
Single-frequency DBR laser diodes, atomic-transition light sources and optical cavity stabilization for quantum computingUnited States
75.0 /100 · editorial assessment

Photodigm manufactures compact laser diodes used as stable optical sources in quantum apparatus. Its quantum-computing relevance is directly evidenced by a laser’s role in controlling an atom–cavity experiment.

DBR laser componentsResearch brief reviewed · brief refresh dueEvidence list: 3 source pages
Capability 3 / 4
Delivery 3 / 4
Use in practice 3 / 4
Integration 3 / 4

Limitation: The cited laser is one component of a larger research apparatus. Qubit and entanglement results are not supplier-only performance, and current availability of that exact historical model is not established.

Full company research →
75.0/ 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? for Photodigm

This score reflects documented maturity using the enabling technology weighting.

Capability 30% weight
3 / 4 · 22.5 points
Delivery 30% weight
3 / 4 · 22.5 points
Use in practice 25% weight
3 / 4 · 18.75 points
Integration 15% weight
3 / 4 · 11.25 points

Strength: External experimental methods identify the exact laser model and its integration with named control equipment.

Limitation: The cited laser is one component of a larger research apparatus. Qubit and entanglement results are not supplier-only performance, and current availability of that exact historical model is not established.

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 →
Rank8(tie)
Cryogenic microwave switches, attenuators, coaxial cables and high-density interconnects for quantum processorsFrance
75.0 /100 · editorial assessment

Radiall connects and switches microwave signals in quantum-computing cryostats. Its offering includes cable assemblies, thermal-stage attenuation and low-power cryogenic switches that external controllers can operate.

RF components by part numberResearch brief reviewed · brief refresh dueEvidence list: 3 source pages
Capability 3 / 4
Delivery 3 / 4
Use in practice 3 / 4
Integration 3 / 4

Limitation: The NPL announcement does not publish the measured S-parameter dataset. Interoperability is verified for named switch models and does not establish every configuration or long-term switching lifetime.

Full company research →
75.0/ 100
Primarily organization-sourced

The assessment is primarily supported by organization-originated evidence. External evidence does not meet the published half-of-weight threshold.

3 assessment sourcesAssessment reviewed Assessment refresh due
Why this position? for Radiall

This score reflects documented maturity using the enabling technology weighting.

Capability 30% weight
3 / 4 · 22.5 points
Delivery 30% weight
3 / 4 · 22.5 points
Use in practice 25% weight
3 / 4 · 18.75 points
Integration 15% weight
3 / 4 · 11.25 points

Strength: Primary evidence includes an external metrology partner and specific third-party product interoperability.

Limitation: The NPL announcement does not publish the measured S-parameter dataset. Interoperability is verified for named switch models and does not establish every configuration or long-term switching lifetime.

Primarily organization-sourced · 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 →
Since your review

Scope: Enabling technology. Reading a page never marks its records reviewed.

Keep a baseline and explicitly mark the evidence you have reviewed. This optional journal stays in this browser.

Existing material records remain available after setup. Routine rechecks and initial entries are excluded from material counts.

Public 7-day, 30-day & full history →
Coverage, methodology & sector field guide

Equal scores share a position within their sector.

22 assessed / 110 listed

Directory inclusion is separate from assessment.

A field guide to this sectorKnow what to compare

Find the component your system needs

Control electronics, cryogenics and cloud infrastructure enable quantum systems. Their specifications measure their own role, not the performance of an entire quantum computer.

Control stack
Electronics and software that operate and read quantum devices.
Cryogenics
Cooling systems used to maintain very low operating temperatures.

Three questions worth asking

  1. Are the interfaces compatible with your existing hardware?
  2. Are performance limits stated under realistic loads and operating conditions?
  3. What installation, calibration and support does the supplier provide?
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.

Common QRank questions
Does the highest score mean the fastest computer?
No. QRank assesses documented maturity within a sector. Performance depends on the product, workload and test conditions.
Why does a listed organization have no score?
A listing and a complete assessment are different. No published assessment means no score has been published; it does not mean poor performance. An expired assessment can remain in a profile as history.
Does a larger qubit count mean better performance?
No. Physical and error-corrected logical qubits describe different things. Operations, errors and the resources needed for the task matter too.
Do more sources mean stronger proof?
Several pages can describe the same experiment. Company sources can document useful results; external authors may be collaborators. Neither link counts nor external-source badges establish independent replication. The evidence list counts distinct assessment and profile-research URLs; guides can link to additional context.
Does a new source update the score?
No. Research context and assessment reviews are separate. Scores change only when the criterion inputs are reviewed and a change is recorded. Source checks and formatting edits do not renew an assessment date.
Why is an assessment date older than the research?
A profile can include later context while retaining its earlier score review. A review is due after 30 days; assessments older than 90 days leave the current ranking. The date does not promise a future review.
How do I check access and pricing?
Use the linked official route for the named product. Plans, regions, eligibility and features can change; a simulation, pilot or partner integration does not establish public hardware access.
How can I suggest a correction?
Use a claim’s correction link and include the product, source location and proposed change, or email contact@qubitwire.com. Submitting evidence does not automatically change a score.
What matters in this sectorView scoring weights

Controls, cryogenics and other infrastructure are evaluated for documented maturity within their role, not as interchangeable products.

30%Capability

Specified component or service performance and reliability.

30%Delivery

Supported products, operating resources and clear access.

25%Use in practice

External laboratory, vendor or customer use with stated outcomes.

15%Integration

Compatibility, interfaces and maintained integration resources.

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.

Browse all 192 research profiles by sector
Read, question, follow the source

What would the next piece of evidence show?

Company guides trace the path from an announcement to a measured component, accepted system or exact product certification.

Company evidence guideIQM: when is an installed system accepted?Follow an installed quantum system from supplier delivery to customer acceptance.Context reviewed

It identifies the traded instrument and its relationship to the underlying shares. Readers should use that instrument when checking issuer filings or a licensed quote provider; a warrant or Helsinki share line needs its own identity and market metadata.

Full company guide, sources and limits →
Company evidence guideXanadu: what does a foundry partnership establish?Connect the new foundry agreement to the measurements that would establish manufacturing readiness.Context reviewed

It establishes the agreement described by the parties. Production readiness needs additional evidence about fabricated devices, yield, repeatability, packaging and accepted system performance. The record deliberately treats those as separate steps.

Full company guide, sources and limits →
Company evidence guidePasqal: what runs on an analog quantum processor?The cited issuer identity and the task a reader can execute using an analog platform.Context reviewed

Yes, as transaction history with its original date and status. Use the later completed-transaction and reporting evidence to distinguish the completed state from the earlier proposal.

Full company guide, sources and limits →
Company evidence guideAlice & Bob: what can researchers measure on the testbed?Use the Helium announcement to ask precise questions about encoded experiments and partner access.Context reviewed

No. The complete encoded operation still has to account for the error processes that remain, including those associated with control, measurement and correction. The value of a biased-noise architecture depends on how those parts work together.

Full company guide, sources and limits →
Company evidence guideDiraq: from fabricated devices to usable qubitsRead the eight-qubit foundry result through the denominators that manufacturing requires.Context reviewed

It can show that a particular process supports functioning quantum devices under stated conditions. The next questions concern reproducibility and integration; a small result need not answer those questions to be technically useful.

Full company guide, sources and limits →
Company evidence guideQuantum Motion: what makes a system installation reproducible?Turn a full-stack deployment claim into a record of what users can reproduce.Context reviewed

It can clarify what was delivered, accepted and made available within the testbed. The supplier and customer may describe different boundaries, so retaining both documents helps readers understand the actual service or research capability.

Full company guide, sources and limits →
Company evidence guideOxford Ionics: how to read its benchmark historyKeep original experiments, acquisition history and later integration results in separate dated records.Context reviewed

No. It changes the organizational context, not the experiment that was performed. The result should retain its original provenance and be linked to the current ownership timeline.

Full company guide, sources and limits →
Company evidence guideQblox: what does timing mean in a control system?Evaluate control electronics against an experiment’s signals and timing obligations.Context reviewed

The channels must support the required amplitude, noise, bandwidth, synchronization and readout relationships. A larger count cannot answer those compatibility questions by itself.

Full company guide, sources and limits →
Company evidence guideQuantum Machines: why do calibration results need software versions?Trace a calibration claim through its controller, software versions, fit and final validation.Context reviewed

It can alter waveform construction, fitting, scheduling, parameter selection or result handling. A version record helps separate those changes from physical-device changes and makes a later comparison more meaningful.

Full company guide, sources and limits →
Company evidence guideBluefors: which parts of a quantum system need cooling?A cryogenic partnership becomes useful when the cooled subsystem and thermal load are explicit.Context reviewed

The temperature requirements belong to particular components and detectors, not to the word photonic as a whole. A system-level description should identify those components and their operating conditions.

Full company guide, sources and limits →
Company evidence guideArqit: what does a quantum-safe product protect?Classify ARQQ through its security products and examine the trust boundary behind the label.Context reviewed

No. These security products are intended to address cryptographic threats, including future quantum threats. The business and technical evidence therefore centre on deployment, assurance and integration rather than processor benchmarks.

Full company guide, sources and limits →
Company evidence guideSEALSQ: how can a product certification be checked?Follow each chip from a certification target to an exact, checkable assurance record.Context reviewed

No. It states planned milestones. Completion requires the relevant authoritative record and the exact product configuration to which it applies.

Full company guide, sources and limits →