Diese Seite auf Deutsch lesen → Already a customer? Sign in →
The quantum vendor field, with the sources attached.
Every hardware vendor’s specifications, roadmap milestones and slippage record. Every MERIQ use-case scorecard with its binding constraint and horizon. Every public quantum company’s filings read for what they say about whether the roadmap is funded. One dataset, maintained, with a date and a citation on every number.
Access by request Built for the person who has to brief a board on quantum computing and cannot afford to repeat a vendor’s press release. Tell us what you are deciding and we will get back to you within one business day.
What the platform holds
Five modules over one corpus. The joins between them are the point: a hardware milestone that moves changes a use-case window, and a use-case requirement is what makes a milestone worth watching.
Vendor profiles and comparison
Superconducting, trapped-ion, neutral-atom, photonic and annealing vendors side by side: physical qubits, logical qubits demonstrated, gate and readout error, coherence, connectivity, native gate sets, error-correction approach and threshold, cloud availability. Filterable, and every cell carries its source and date.
Roadmaps and slippage
Vendor milestones on a shared time axis, switchable between physical and logical qubits because the two are not comparable. Demonstrated results are drawn solid, projections dashed. Milestones that have moved keep their original date on the chart — the slippage record is intelligence nobody else publishes in structured form.
MERIQ use-case benchmarks
Scored use cases with the full published scorecard: five criteria against published anchors, the rationale for each, the weakest-link cap, the binding constraint, and the horizon — dated or explicitly not. Each one mapped to the roadmap milestones that would have to land first.
Briefs and change record
Every figure that moves is logged with its date, its source and a note on why it matters. Periodic briefs read the quarter: which milestone landed, which slipped, which research result moved a score. This is what a subscription is for — the dataset is maintained, not published once.
Investor and filings analysis
The listed pure plays, the parents, the pre-IPO candidates and the private rounds. Filings and earnings calls read for one question a roadmap page cannot answer: is the announced capital expenditure funded? Verbatim quotes, sourced figures, and our own arithmetic labelled as ours. Not investment advice.
Provenance, structurally
There is no way to record a number in this dataset without its status, its basis and its date — the schema refuses it, and the service refuses to start if a citation does not resolve. That is a deliberate constraint on us, not a feature list.
A worked example, from the corpus
The MERIQ portfolio published in whitepaper v1.0 is in the platform as structured data, alongside the hardware milestones each case is waiting on. This is the actual shape of a use-case record.
▶ MERIQ scorecard V A D F R total level
───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
sketched streaming 4 3 3 3 3 64 L3 Demonstrated
fraud detection
▶ binding A, D, F, R — bound four ways at once
▶ verdict datable, conditionally
▶ horizon early fault-tolerant · 2029–2031
▶ score history
2026-04-01 48 → 64 quantum oracle sketching + shadow readout
data basis moved 1 → 3 (the route stopped needing QRAM);
advantage and resources dragged up behind it; value and
feasibility did not move. The variational card it
supersedes still reads 48 — a new access model is a new
triple, not a better score for the old one.
▶ requirements < 60 logical qubits [published estimate]
binding resource logical-gate throughput, not qubit count
▶ earliest plausible window
trapped ion 2029–2031 capacity is not the constraint —
Helios already runs 48 logical;
gate speed is
superconducting 2029–2032 µs cycle times suit a stream;
decoder latency is the open question
Read what the last block is doing. It is not a forecast. It is a human comparison of a published requirement against dated vendor milestones, stored with its reasoning, so you can disagree with the reasoning rather than with a number. Deriving those windows mechanically from vendor roadmaps would turn marketing into prediction, which is the one thing this dataset is built not to do.
The conventions we hold ourselves to
A paid intelligence product is only worth its provenance discipline. These are enforced in the data layer, not left to editorial care.
- Every figure carries a status, a basis and a date. Status says whether something was demonstrated, announced, projected or estimated. Basis says who stands behind it — a journal, the vendor, a third party, or us. A vendor’s roadmap target renders as “IBM-reported target”, never as a prediction of ours.
- Demonstrated and projected never look alike. Solid lines and filled markers for results; dashed lines and open markers for plans. Roadmap dates are envelopes, not forecasts — and the envelope moves when either curve moves.
- Physical and logical qubits stay separate. Different fields, different chart axes. Different vendors mean measurably different things by “logical qubit”, and comparing the raw counts is the single most common way this field is misread.
- Capacity and occupancy stay separate too. A 35×35 tweezer array has 1,225 sites and ran 1,180 atoms. Those are two numbers, they are both real, and most coverage quotes whichever is larger. The schema will not let them merge.
- Our own arithmetic is labelled as ours. Where we back-compute a physical-qubit count from a logical target, or a cash runway from a filing, it is marked a JoS estimate wherever it appears — including inside charts, where such a figure would otherwise travel without its caveat.
- Sources carry an access date. Vendors rewrite roadmap pages without notice. Noticing that is half of what this product is for, which is why a citation without a date is not accepted.
- A missing figure is an open task, never a negative. “No published two-qubit fidelity” and “poor two-qubit fidelity” are different findings, and only one of them is about the vendor. Several profiles are thin because the evidence is thin; the platform says which.
Request access
Accounts are provisioned by hand, so tell us what you are working on — it decides whether the platform is any use to you, and we would rather say so than sell you a login.
Received.
We will come back to you within one business day — usually with a question about the use case you named, because that is what decides whether this dataset earns its subscription for you.
If you would rather start from the free end: the public MERIQ scorer takes about three minutes on one of your own use cases, and a submitted scorecard names the use case, the scaling axis and where you think you stand — which makes the first conversation a discussion of your evidence rather than of our method.
Data & privacy
- Nothing is sent until you press the button. This page sets no cookies, runs no analytics and does no tracking.
- Controller. JoS QUANTUM GmbH, Platz der Einheit 2, c/o TechQuartier, 60327 Frankfurt am Main, Germany — info@jos-quantum.de. Full details in the site notice.
- What we process. Your name, e-mail address and company, and — only if you fill them in — your role and your message. Alongside these we store two technical values for abuse prevention and diagnostics: the page the request came from, and your browser’s user-agent string, truncated. We do not store your IP address in our database.
- Purposes and legal basis. Processing your access request, provisioning an account if we agree terms, and contacting you by e-mail about JoS Quantum Intelligence and related services. Legal basis is your consent, Art. 6(1)(a) GDPR — given by ticking the box above, withdrawable at any time with effect for the future.
- Processors and recipients. Your details are received and stored on Google Cloud (Cloud Run and Firestore) in region europe-west3 (Frankfurt am Main), under Google’s Cloud Data Processing Addendum (Art. 28 GDPR). Google’s infrastructure logs record the requesting IP address for up to 30 days for operation and abuse prevention; we do not copy it into our database. We do not share your details with any other third party.
- If you become a subscriber. The platform itself is a separate application, also hosted on Google Cloud in Frankfurt. It uses one strictly necessary session cookie holding your username, valid for eight hours, and stores your language preference in your browser. It runs no analytics and loads nothing from third parties beyond web fonts. Your account details — username, organisation, access end date — are processed to perform the contract, Art. 6(1)(b) GDPR, and deleted when the account is closed. The platform’s own privacy notice is reachable from its sign-in screen.
- Retention. Access requests that do not become accounts: reviewed and deleted at the latest 12 months after our last contact with you. Requests that become accounts follow the retention above.
- Your rights. Access, rectification, erasure, restriction, portability and objection (Art. 15–21 GDPR); withdrawal of consent at any time via info@jos-quantum.de; complaint to a supervisory authority — for us, the Hessian Commissioner for Data Protection and Freedom of Information.
- Third-party loads on this site. Like every page here, this one loads fonts and icons from content-delivery networks (Google Fonts, cdnjs); see the site-wide privacy notice.
Before you ask
- This is a curated dataset, not a live feed. Figures are checked on a monthly sweep and a deeper quarterly pass, and every one shows when it was last current. A platform that claimed real-time hardware specifications would be claiming something no vendor publishes.
- Some profiles are thin. Several vendors publish a qubit count and no fidelity, or a roadmap and no characterisation. Where the evidence is thin the profile is thin and says so — filling the gap with a plausible number would defeat the purpose.
- The MERIQ layer is the published one. Criterion scores, anchors, rationales, the weakest-link cap and the horizon logic are all here and all contestable against the public rubric. The calibration weights and the benchmark library that keep a 4 meaning the same thing across quarters are what an engagement adds, and are not in the platform.
- The investor module is analysis, not advice. Filings and calls are quoted verbatim with their source; figures we derive are labelled as ours. Nothing in it is a recommendation to buy or sell anything.
- The interface is bilingual; the analysis is in English. Navigation, labels and this page exist in German. The curated notes, rationales and briefs are written in English, and translating them would halve how often they are updated.