The article analyzes IonQ and Rigetti Computing, two pure-play quantum computing companies, contrasting their technological approaches and investment potential. IonQ employs a trapped-ion method, boasting superior accuracy (99.97% two-qubit fidelity) and room-temperature operation, which is deemed crucial for commercial viability despite potentially slower processing. Rigetti utilizes a superconducting approach, offering better processing speeds but lower accuracy (99.5% two-qubit fidelity) and requiring cryogenic temperatures. Given the highly speculative nature and long-term horizon of quantum computing, with 2030 cited as a potential turning point, the piece recommends a diversified investment strategy, such as holding both stocks or investing in a quantum computing ETF, to mitigate risk and capitalize on the emerging industry's growth.
Quantum computing investing is an incredibly speculative space, but if you pick the right company, you could be rewarded with incredible results. On the flip side, if you pick the wrong stock, the investment could go to zero. There are also two types of companies in this realm: Pure-plays and legacy big tech. Legacy big tech includes companies like Alphabet and IBM that are getting into the quantum computing race, and have businesses to fall back on if their quantum computing endeavors don't pan out. These are much safer investments, but don't have near the upside potential as investing in pure-plays like IonQ (IONQ -5.73%) or Rigetti Computing (RGTI -1.62%). Both of these are popular pure-play quantum computing stock picks, but does one offer a more compelling investing case than the other? Let's find out. The two are taking fundamentally different paths Rigetti Computing and IonQ are taking two different approaches to quantum computing. Rigetti Computing is using superconducting quantum computing, which is the approach that many companies are taking, including most of the legacy tech businesses. This technique cools a particle down to absolute zero, then uses its quantum mechanics for calculations. Cooling a particle down to absolute zero isn't cheap, so this gives IonQ an advantage. IonQ uses a trapped ion approach, which can be done at room temperature. Furthermore, IonQ's trapped ion approach is far more accurate, and IonQ holds world records in one-qubit and two-qubit gate fidelity tests, which measure how accurate a quantum computer is. IonQ's two-qubit gate fidelity sits at 99.97%, while Rigetti's system has a 99.5% two-qubit gate fidelity. While IonQ's advantage may not sound like much, that extra 0.47% is incredibly difficult to come by and shows the inherent accuracy advantage of the trapped ion approach. NYSE: IONQ Key Data Points However, IonQ's accuracy advantage isn't without its drawbacks. Superconducting quantum computing has far better processing speeds. So, the question of which technology will become commercially relevant boils down to what the market wants. For a quantum computer to be commercially viable, it must be accurate. This makes IonQ seem like the better buy. However, if Rigetti can reach an accuracy level that's on par with IonQ -- say, a year or two later -- IonQ may not have established a strong enough foothold to hold off a competitor with superior processing speed. It's impossible to predict the winner of this outcome years before it happens. Both Rigetti and IonQ point toward 2030 as being a turning point in quantum computing relevance, and predicting that far out is a fool's errand. As a result, there may be a better option than picking just Rigetti or IonQ. Picking both stocks increases the odds of success Instead of picking one or the other, I'd advise that investors purchase both. That way, if one succeeds while the other flops, the entire investment isn't worthless. Furthermore, the winner of the quantum computing race is likely to provide massive returns, and one gigantic winner can outweigh a lot of losers. This balanced approach decreases the risk in investing in an emerging trend like quantum computing. Another way to invest in both companies while also grabbing some others in the quantum computing realm is by purchasing a quantum computing ETF. This investment basket is filled with stocks that are investing in the quantum computing realm, including legacy tech players. While the upside for this investment isn't as great, it doesn't have nearly the downside, because some large companies won't go belly-up if they fail to deliver a successful quantum computing solution. While I like IonQ's chances a bit more, I can't ignore Rigetti Computing or some of its other peers. That's why I think taking a balanced approach to this industry is a smart idea, and that approach has a much better chance of getting investors positive returns compared to just picking a single pure-play. The quantum computing sector presents a highly speculative investment landscape, characterized by significant upside potential in pure-play companies like IonQ and Rigetti Computing, juxtaposed with the relative safety of legacy tech players such as Alphabet and IBM. However, pure-plays carry substantial risk, with the article explicitly stating investments "could go to zero." This environment necessitates a nuanced approach given the nascent stage of commercial viability, projected for a potential turning point around 2030. IonQ and Rigetti employ fundamentally different quantum computing architectures. IonQ utilizes a trapped-ion approach, enabling room-temperature operation and achieving superior accuracy with a 99.97% two-qubit gate fidelity, holding world records in fidelity tests. Conversely, Rigetti's superconducting method offers better processing speeds but requires expensive cryogenic cooling and has a lower 99.5% two-qubit gate fidelity. The article highlights accuracy as paramount for commercial viability, initially favoring IonQ's technological edge, which is reflected in its positive per-ticker sentiment (0.4) compared to Rigetti's (-0.2). Despite IonQ's accuracy advantage, its technology may have slower processing speeds, while Rigetti possesses superior speed. The long-term commercial winner hinges on whether Rigetti can close the accuracy gap, potentially leveraging its speed, or if IonQ can maintain its lead. Given the difficulty in predicting the outcome years in advance, with both companies targeting 2030 for relevance, the sector remains highly uncertain and calls for strategic portfolio construction rather than singular bets; the overall sentiment is mixed and cautious, with a score of 0.05.
AI-powered research, real-time alerts, and portfolio analytics for institutional investors.
Request a DemoOverall Sentiment
mixed
Sentiment Score
0.05
Ticker Sentiment
