Bitcoin faces real quantum risks that are already transforming the market

The threat of quantum computing to Bitcoin is no longer theoretical. What was once seen as a distant concern is now driving concrete decisions in institutional portfolios and moving markets. Recent research and significant shifts in investment strategies demonstrate that the risk clock is ticking faster than many expected.

Bitcoin’s weak performance compared to gold in 2026 — with a relative decline of 6.5% while gold rises 55% — reveals more than ordinary market cycles. Behind these numbers is a growing concern about the long-term security of the cryptocurrency against quantum computers that could compromise its cryptographic system.

The strategic shift of major investors in the face of quantum threats

Jefferies strategist Christopher Wood made a move that caught the sector’s attention: he eliminated a 10% position in Bitcoin from his “Greed & Fear” model portfolio, reallocating those funds to physical gold and mining stocks. His reasoning was straightforward: quantum computing could break the ECDSA (Elliptic Curve Digital Signature Algorithm) keys that protect Bitcoin, questioning its reliability as a store of value.

This is not an isolated concern. As a prominent user on X pointed out: “Financial advisors read these studies and keep low or zero allocations because quantum computing is an existential threat. It will be like a weight on BTC until it’s solved.”

However, institutional responses are mixed. While Christopher Wood and others reduce exposure, Harvard reportedly increased its Bitcoin allocation by nearly 240%. Morgan Stanley began recommending its wealth management clients allocate up to 4% of their portfolios to crypto assets, while Bank of America allows ranges from 1% to 4%. This shows that institutional support is not disappearing but being redistributed based on individual risk assessments.

The technical reality: how vulnerable is Bitcoin really?

Numbers speak for themselves. A 2025 study by Chaincode Labs estimated that between 20% and 50% of circulating Bitcoin addresses are vulnerable to future quantum attacks due to public key reuse. This amounts to approximately 6.26 million BTC, valued between $650 billion and $750 billion, at potential risk.

David Duong of Coinbase identified two main attack vectors: quantum machines breaking ECDSA or targeting SHA-256, which underpins Bitcoin’s proof-of-work system. The most exposed addresses include legacy Pay-to-Public-Key scripts, certain multisig wallets, and exposed Taproot configurations.

As the number of qubits in quantum machines grows — especially following Google’s advances in 2025 — the possibility of relevant cryptographic quantum computers (CRQC) becomes more realistic. Projection charts show exponential growth in quantum hardware capacity.

The biggest challenge: decentralized coordination

This is where the real problem lies. Unlike traditional banks that can impose security upgrades through centralized authority, Bitcoin must coordinate changes across its entire distributed network. There is no risk committee, no mandate, no entity that can enforce immediate action.

As Jamie Coutts noted on X: “I used to ignore quantum computing risks for Bitcoin as something unlikely. I no longer do. Technically, Bitcoin can be upgraded, but it requires slow and complex coordination in a decentralized network. No one can just say: ‘We change now.’”

Paths toward post-quantum security

NIST’s initiative finalized post-quantum cryptography standards in 2024, providing a roadmap for future protection. However, their adoption in Bitcoin remains complex.

Immediate mitigation strategies include: maintaining address hygiene, avoiding public key reuse, and moving BTC to quantum-resistant addresses. Charles Hoskinson of Cardano warns that premature adoption of new standards could severely reduce system efficiency.

DARPA’s Quantum Blockchain Initiative suggests significant threats could emerge in the 2030s. However, projection charts indicate the timeline could accelerate, especially if AI integration shortens quantum development.

From theory to real market impact

What is happening now transcends ordinary market cycles. Bitcoin’s underperformance relative to gold reflects a fundamental reassessment of existential risk affecting how institutions allocate capital. Strategists like Christopher Wood are repositioning portfolios, researchers are quantifying vulnerability, and the network faces an unprecedented technical challenge.

Until Bitcoin can fully coordinate a quantum-resistant upgrade, that burden on BTC will remain as real as the current price of $83.20K, reflecting this long-term uncertainty.