Is Quantum Computing Casting a Shadow Over Bitcoin's Price?

Source: CryptoNewsNet Original Title: Is Quantum Computing Casting a Shadow Over Bitcoin’s Price? Original Link: Over roughly the past year, discussion has grown more pointed over whether the accelerating pace of quantum computing could eventually threaten the Bitcoin network. Prominent crypto advocates have contended that bitcoin’s “underperformance” is linked to quantum-related anxieties.

Bitcoin’s Underwhelming Run Finds a New Villain: Quantum Computing

To some observers, bitcoin (BTC) has lagged in market performance for a considerable stretch. That has fueled debate over whether BTC’s long-discussed four-year cycle is broken, and when set beside precious metals like gold and silver, bitcoin’s price action appears, at best, unflattering.

One explanation, only recently tied to market performance in broader discussions, is growing unease over the possibility of Bitcoin facing attacks from quantum supercomputers. While most of the blame has centered on geopolitics, macro and liquidity pressures, quantum risks are quietly shaping some portfolios.

A clear illustration of this dynamic is a global head of equity strategy at a major financial institution. This month, this analyst dropped a 10% bitcoin allocation from an influential model portfolio, pointing to accelerating quantum computing risks that could threaten Bitcoin’s cryptography and erode its long-term appeal as a store of value. The capital was redirected into physical gold (5%) and gold-mining equities (5%).

Quantum Computing Risk: A Divisive Narrative

Castle Island Ventures partner Nic Carter has been among the most vocal figures on this issue. Carter raised concerns about potential quantum vulnerabilities and explained that Bitcoin developers were “sleepwalking” toward a quantum reckoning. Carter shared commentary suggesting that Bitcoin’s “mysterious” underperformance due to quantum concerns “is the only story that matters this year. The market is speaking— the devs aren’t listening.”

Financial advisors read this kind of research and keep client allocations low or zero because quantum computing is framed as an existential threat. Setting market dynamics aside, Bitcoin developers have been hearing growing and louder feedback from the community for well over a year. Tensions between Bitcoin Core and other developer teams have widened existing divisions, and as quantum computing advances, the community has grown increasingly vocal about the risks and the need for meaningful quantum protections.

What makes the quantum debate especially fraught is how familiar it feels. The widening gap between community urgency and developer restraint echoes debates from years past. Quantum fears may have reopened that old wound, reinforcing a long-standing tension over who ultimately decides Bitcoin’s future—and how responsive development should be when existential concerns collide with protocol conservatism.

Not Everyone’s Buying It: Critics Reject Quantum Blame for Bitcoin

Still, Carter’s view on quantum computing is far from universally accepted. Prominent bitcoin advocate Vijay Boyapati replied that the topic clearly warrants discussion and technical work—and on that point, he aligns with Carter—but he emphasized that he remains “highly skeptical the price action in BTC is explained by QC, notwithstanding there may be some investment notes that have picked up that narrative.”

Other analysts have echoed similar skepticism, expressing doubt that quantum computing concerns meaningfully explain bitcoin’s recent price action. “QC keeps some capital away, but this argument that gold is up and bitcoin is down because of it just isn’t it,” one prominent analyst wrote. “Gold has a bid because sovereigns are buying it in place of treasuries. The trend has been in place since 2008, and has accelerated after geopolitical shifts. Bitcoin saw sell-side pressure from long-term holders in 2025, which would have impacted prior cycles.”

The analyst concluded: “Yes, we should have QC plans in place. But attributing price being down to it as a primary factor, is akin to blaming market manipulation for red candles, and declining exchange balances for green ones.”

Key Takeaways

• Why are some investors linking bitcoin’s performance to quantum computing? Some analysts argue accelerating quantum research could eventually threaten Bitcoin’s cryptography, influencing cautious allocation decisions, particularly among institutional investors.
• Who has raised concerns about quantum risks to Bitcoin? Nic Carter and several market observers have pointed to quantum computing as a potential long-term issue, though the view remains contested.
• Are institutional firms adjusting bitcoin exposure because of quantum fears? Yes, some institutional strategies have reduced bitcoin exposure while favoring gold.
• Do all bitcoin analysts agree quantum risk explains BTC’s price action? No, critics argue macro conditions, not quantum computing, better explain recent market behavior.