My uncle, bless his heart, keeps emailing me about “the future.” Usually, it’s some infomercial for gold bars or a timeshare in Florida. This time, it was quantum computing. He’d forwarded an article claiming it was “the next big thing.” I tried to explain that “big things” tend to arrive with a certain amount of practicality, and that right now, quantum computing feels less like a breakthrough and more like a very expensive thought experiment. He didn’t get it. He thinks I’m overly cautious. He also thinks putting mayonnaise on everything is a valid culinary choice.
Still, the persistent buzz about quantum computing is hard to ignore, even for someone who considers a functional toaster a technological marvel. And frankly, as someone who spends an inordinate amount of time staring at macroeconomic indicators, the sheer scale of potential disruption is… compelling. It’s the sort of thing that keeps me up at night, not because I think I’ll understand it, but because I suspect no one really does.
So, if I had to pick one stock in this bewildering field, one to tentatively, nervously throw a small portion of my portfolio at, it would be IonQ (IONQ +9.01%). Don’t mistake this for confidence. It’s more like a resignation to the fact that someone, somewhere, is going to try and make money off of this, and I’d rather it be a company that’s at least marginally more competent than the rest.
The Accuracy Problem (and My Aunt Mildred)
The problem with quantum computing, as I understand it (which is to say, not at all), is accuracy. It’s like asking my Aunt Mildred to calculate the tip at a restaurant. She’ll get close, but there’s a good chance you’ll end up overpaying. Everyone involved is chasing this elusive metric, trying to minimize the errors. And IonQ, apparently, is currently winning the “least inaccurate” award.
They’ve achieved 99.99% 2-qubit gate fidelity, which sounds impressive until you realize that means one error out of every 10,000 tries. It’s like throwing darts blindfolded and hitting the bullseye once in a while. Good, but hardly a reason to refinance the house. Still, it’s better than most. The competition is lagging, hovering around the 99.9% mark. That 0.09% difference… it’s a tiny fraction, but in a field where precision is paramount, it’s everything. It’s the difference between a successful financial model and a very awkward conversation with my broker.
The real challenge for IonQ isn’t just maintaining this lead, it’s extending it. They need to become so accurate, so reliable, that quantum computers actually solve real-world problems. McKinsey & Company projects a market worth $28 to $72 billion by 2035. That’s a lot of potential upside, but it’s also a lot of pressure. Capturing even a small slice of that pie requires a level of technological dominance that feels… ambitious.
Investing in IonQ feels less like a calculated risk and more like a lottery ticket. It’s akin to backing an early-stage biotech firm: most will fail, but the few that succeed can generate substantial returns. I believe IonQ has a fighting chance, but I have absolutely no assurance it will work out. It’s the kind of investment that requires a strong stomach, a healthy dose of skepticism, and a willingness to accept that sometimes, even the best-laid plans go horribly awry. And honestly, after the last few years, I’m starting to think that’s just the way things are.
Read More
- 2025 Crypto Wallets: Secure, Smart, and Surprisingly Simple!
- Gold Rate Forecast
- Wuchang Fallen Feathers Save File Location on PC
- Where to Change Hair Color in Where Winds Meet
- Brown Dust 2 Mirror Wars (PvP) Tier List – July 2025
- Top 15 Celebrities in Music Videos
- Here Are the Best TV Shows to Stream this Weekend on Paramount+, Including ‘48 Hours’
- Macaulay Culkin Finally Returns as Kevin in ‘Home Alone’ Revival
- HSR 3.7 breaks Hidden Passages, so here’s a workaround
- Solel Partners’ $29.6 Million Bet on First American: A Deep Dive into Housing’s Unseen Forces
2026-02-17 00:22