Here's a simplified, "Quantum computing cheat sheet" that may help you understand the various approaches to this vital tech of the future!

 

Quantum Technology Investment Report (2025, updated)

Cheat Sheet by Platform

1. Superconducting devices (IBM, Google, Rigetti)

   • Maturity: Most advanced gate-based stack; late-decade FTQC roadmaps.

   • Pros: Rich software ecosystem, strong enterprise/government demand.

   • Cons: Cryogenic complexity, wiring bottlenecks at large scale.

2. Trapped ions (IonQ, Quantinuum)

   • Maturity: Best qubit fidelities; logical-qubit demonstrations live on commercial hardware.

   • Pros: High gate quality, long coherence.

   • Cons: Slower gates, engineering challenges for very large systems.

3. Neutral atoms (Infleqtion, Pasqal, QuEra, Atom Computing)

   • Maturity: Fastest scaling potential (large, reconfigurable arrays).

   • New catalyst: Infleqtion going public via CCCX ($1.8B valuation; $540M gross proceeds including $125M PIPE).

   • Pros: Large qubit arrays, parallelism, dual business in sensing (clocks, RF, inertial).

   • Cons: Fidelity still catching up to ions/superconductors.

4. Photons (PsiQuantum, Xanadu)

   • Maturity: Highly funded; fab-compatible.

   • Pros: Room-temperature, natural networking.

   • Cons: Photon source brightness, error correction hurdles.

5. Particle spin (silicon spins, NV centers)

   • Maturity: CMOS compatibility (Intel, GlobalFoundries); NV centers strong in sensing.

   • Pros: Semiconductor supply chain leverage.

   • Cons: Fabrication variability, noise.

6. Quasiparticles (Majoranas, excitons, magnons)

   • Maturity: Early-stage research; Microsoft leading Majorana work.

   • Pros: Potential intrinsic error protection.

   • Cons: Experimental, uncertain reproducibility.

---

Updated our “Top 6” Quantum Stock Picks

1. IonQ (IONQ) — Ion-trap pure play with scale roadmap, big-tech/US government contracts.

2. Churchill Capital Corp X (CCCX → INFQ at close) — Neutral-atom + sensing pure play; SPAC risk, but strong PIPE.

3. Rigetti (RGTI) — Superconducting; turnaround in progress, defense contracts add upside.

4. IBM (IBM) — Superconducting leader, steady enterprise adoption.

5. GlobalFoundries (GFS) — Picks-and-shovels enabler for silicon spin qubits & photonics.

6. GOOG - Super conducting leader - gate based stack

---

Two-Bucket Model (2025)

Bucket 1: Pure-Play Upside (high beta, tech leaders)

• IonQ (IONQ): ~3–4% allocation
  Catalyst: Next logical-qubit demo, enterprise adoption updates.

• CCCX → INFQ (Infleqtion): ~2–3% allocation
  Catalyst: PIPE close, SEC S-4 effectiveness, shareholder vote, SPAC redemptions, first Tiqker atomic clock shipments.

• Rigetti (RGTI): ~2% allocation
  Catalyst: New government contracts, roadmap to multi-chip modules, progress on gate fidelity.

Total pure-play allocation: ~7–9% of portfolio.

Bucket 2: Diversified Enablers (lower beta, long-horizon exposure)

• IBM (IBM): ~2–3% allocation
  Catalyst: Scaling roadmap updates (1000+ qubit milestones), enterprise partnerships.

• GlobalFoundries (GFS): ~2% allocation
  Catalyst: Foundry deals for spin qubits, photonics, quantum networking chips.

• Microsoft (MSFT), Alphabet (GOOGL), Intel (INTC): optional ~1–2% each for broad AI/quantum ecosystem exposure.

Total diversified allocation: ~6–9% of portfolio.

---

Key Catalysts to Track

• PIPE close & S-4 effectiveness (CCCX/INFQ) → first confirmation of SPAC funding strength.

• Shareholder vote & redemption window → determines actual cash on Infleqtion’s balance sheet.

• First Tiqker customer shipments → validates earlier revenue via sensing products.

• Next logical-qubit demo (IonQ, Quantinuum, IBM) → milestone toward error-corrected workloads.

• Government contracts/defense programs (Rigetti, Infleqtion, IBM) → recurring revenue signals.

---

📊 Tiered Portfolio Allocation for Quantum Technologies (2025–2030)

1. Balanced Strategy (risk-adjusted, diversified)

• Core (40–45%)

  • Superconducting (IBM, Rigetti, Alphabet)

  • Trapped Ions (IonQ)

  • Rationale: These platforms have the most technical readiness, large-cap support, and steady roadmaps. They anchor the portfolio.

• Speculative (20–25%)

  • Neutral Atoms (Infleqtion → INFQ)

  • Photons (PsiQuantum, Xanadu)

  • Rationale: High-growth, high-risk platforms that could leapfrog, but funding cycles and technical hurdles are non-trivial. Position sizing smaller keeps risk in check.

• Enablers (25–30%)

  • Particle Spins (Intel, GlobalFoundries)

  • Rationale: Semiconductor-synergy “picks and shovels” angle, giving steadier returns and exposure to ecosystem build-out.

• Moonshot (5–10%)

  • Quasiparticles (Microsoft’s topological R&D)

  • Rationale: Tiny allocation for the optionality of a breakthrough in Majorana/topological qubits.

---

2. Aggressive Strategy (growth-maximized, higher beta)

• Core (30–35%)

  • Still anchor with superconducting + ions (IBM, Rigetti, IonQ).

• Speculative (35–40%)

  • Lean heavily into Neutral Atoms (Infleqtion/INFQ) and Photonics (PsiQuantum, Xanadu) given their scale/revenue catalysts.

• Enablers (20–25%)

  • Intel + GFS remain in the mix, but lower weight relative to balanced.

• Moonshot (10%)

  • Keep a higher-than-usual bet on quasiparticles — since in a high-risk posture, a tail-event breakthrough could be transformative.

---

✅ Key takeaway:

• The balanced strategy emphasizes survivability and long-term compounding, anchored by superconducting/ions + semiconductor enablers.

• The aggressive strategy emphasizes speculative platforms (Infleqtion’s neutral atoms, photonic plays) where valuations could swing most sharply.

---

Summary:

• Pure-play upside (IONQ, INFQ, RGTI) offers high growth but high volatility; size positions cautiously.

• Diversified enablers (IBM, GFS, large-cap tech) provide stability, supply-chain leverage, and broader AI/quantum synergies.

• Watch catalysts closely: successful Infleqtion de-SPAC, logical-qubit demos, and early product shipments could trigger reratings across the sector.