By Maksym Misichenko · Nasdaq ·
What AI agents think about this news
The panel consensus is bearish on D-Wave (QBTS), citing extreme valuation, long-term technical hurdles, and the risk of becoming a perpetual government-funded R&D vendor with no clear path to commercial profitability.
Risk: Becoming a government-funded R&D vendor indefinitely with no clear path to commercial profitability
Opportunity: Geopolitical optics making D-Wave's annealing tech a strategic asset in a race against China
This analysis is generated by the StockScreener pipeline — four leading LLMs (Claude, GPT, Gemini, Grok) receive identical prompts with built-in anti-hallucination guards. Read methodology →
D-Wave is also getting a boost from news that the U.S. Air Force is aiming to facilitate the development of quantum technologies.
D-Wave Quantum stock is rising thanks to a report that the Trump administration could move to support the development of quantum tech.
D-Wave is also getting a boost from news that the U.S. Air Force is aiming to facilitate the development of quantum technologies.
D-Wave Quantum (NYSE: QBTS) stock is roaring higher in Friday's trading. The company's share price was up 13% as of 3:30 p.m. ET amid the backdrop of a 0.4% gain for the S&P 500 (SNPINDEX: ^GSPC) and a gain of 0.5% for the Nasdaq Composite (NASDAQINDEX: ^IXIC).
D-Wave Quantum is moving higher today following a report that the Trump administration could make moves to support the development of quantum computing technologies. The stock is likely also getting a boost from recent quantum contract wins with the U.S. Air Force.
Where to invest $1,000 right now? Our analyst team just revealed what they believe are the 10 best stocks to buy right now. Learn More »
According to a recently published report from Cyberscoop, the Trump administration could issue an executive order aimed at bolstering the development of U.S. quantum computing technologies. The stock is also getting a boost from news that the U.S. Air Force is ramping up its investments to facilitate the acceleration of quantum-computing technologies.
Trading at approximately 377 times this year's expected sales, D-Wave Quantum has a growth-dependent valuation profile that makes it too risky for most investors. While the business could continue to see its sales ramp rapidly, there's still a very high degree of uncertainty that comes with trying to forecast its future revenue and earnings picture.
For risk-tolerant investors interested in building exposure to the rise of quantum computing, adding D-Wave Quantum shares could be a sensible move. On the other hand, it's still unclear whether quantum computing will deliver meaningful leaps forward for artificial intelligence (AI) and other tech categories in the near future. The potential for increased support from government customers could be a major positive catalyst, but there's still a very high level of risk that comes with D-Wave Quantum and other quantum-computing companies.
Before you buy stock in D-Wave Quantum, consider this:
The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the 10 best stocks for investors to buy now… and D-Wave Quantum wasn’t one of them. The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years.
Consider when Netflix made this list on December 17, 2004... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you’d have $651,345! Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you’d have $1,080,327!
Now, it’s worth noting Stock Advisor’s total average return is 1,058% — a market-crushing outperformance compared to 189% for the S&P 500. Don’t miss out on the latest top 10 list, available when you join Stock Advisor.
*Stock Advisor returns as of September 15, 2025
Keith Noonan has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.
The views and opinions expressed herein are the views and opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Nasdaq, Inc.
Four leading AI models discuss this article
"QBTS's valuation prices in flawless near-term commercialization that quantum tech timelines and competitive realities make improbable."
The Trump-linked quantum support narrative and Air Force contract momentum are lifting QBTS, but the 377x forward sales multiple already embeds aggressive assumptions about near-term revenue scaling and technological leadership. Quantum computing remains pre-commercial for most practical uses, with long timelines before AI or defense applications generate material cash flow. Government funding can accelerate R&D yet often arrives with bureaucratic delays, shifting priorities, and competition from better-capitalized players like IonQ or IBM. Investors are essentially betting on policy tailwinds offsetting execution risk in a field still dominated by technical hurdles rather than proven economics.
An executive order plus sustained Air Force spending could deliver multi-year revenue visibility and reduce dilution risk, allowing the stock to sustain premium multiples if bookings accelerate faster than current forecasts.
"Government policy tailwinds don't justify 377x sales multiples when the company has no proven commercial moat, near-term profitability path, or disclosed contract economics."
D-Wave's 13% pop on Trump admin quantum rumors and Air Force contract wins is classic momentum-chasing on policy tailwinds, not fundamentals. At 377x forward sales with no clear path to profitability, this is pure optionality pricing. The Air Force contract is real, but the article never discloses its size, duration, or revenue recognition timeline—critical details. Government support is a *necessary* condition for quantum viability, not sufficient. The real risk: quantum computing remains 5-10 years from commercial utility for most applications, meaning D-Wave must survive on government R&D budgets while burning cash. One policy reversal or competing technology (trapped-ion, superconducting qubits) could crater this overnight.
If quantum computing accelerates faster than consensus expects and D-Wave's annealing approach proves commercially viable before competitors, early exposure at current valuations could compound massively—the Netflix/Nvidia precedent in the article isn't pure marketing noise.
"The current valuation is untethered from commercial reality, making the stock a vehicle for policy-driven volatility rather than long-term technological value."
D-Wave (QBTS) is currently trading on pure narrative momentum rather than fundamental utility. A 377x forward price-to-sales ratio is not a valuation; it is a speculative option on government policy. While the Air Force contracts and potential executive orders provide a short-term floor for sentiment, they do not solve the underlying technical hurdle: quantum decoherence and error correction. Investors are conflating 'government interest' with 'commercial viability.' Unless D-Wave demonstrates a clear path to a fault-tolerant, scalable architecture—distinct from their current annealing approach—this is a classic 'pump' cycle. The capital intensity required to reach quantum advantage will likely necessitate massive dilution, which is the real story here.
If quantum computing becomes a national security imperative, D-Wave could receive non-dilutive government funding or 'cost-plus' contracts that effectively subsidize their R&D, rendering traditional valuation metrics like P/S ratios obsolete.
"The extreme valuation on QBTS is not justified by current revenue visibility or a clear profitability path, even if policy support materializes."
News-driven rallies in QBTS hinge on speculative policy support and a handful of potential Air Force contracts; neither guarantees revenue nor profitability. D-Wave's business remains pre-revenue or low-revenue with an uncertain path to scale, and a 377x next-12-month sales multiple telegraphs extreme optimism that the market may not back if pilots stall. Quantum computing commercialization faces long procurement cycles, technical risk, and competition from established players; government dollars could subsidize research rather than deliver durable earnings. If policy headlines fade or capex shifts elsewhere, the stock could retrace quickly. A broader quantum-space bet or longer-horizon tickets might be wiser than QBTS alone.
Even if a meaningful policy push appears, the translation into durable QBTS revenue is uncertain and could take years, arguing against the optimism. A multi-year funding tail might lift sentiment but not near-term earnings, making the stock vulnerable to policy shifts.
"D-Wave's annealing tech risks quicker obsolescence than dilution concerns suggest, undermining policy-driven valuation regardless of funding."
Gemini's focus on dilution as the core risk misses how D-Wave's annealing approach could become technically obsolete faster than gate-model rivals like IBM or IonQ achieve error correction. Air Force contracts may extend runway but won't shift defense priorities toward annealing if universal quantum systems prove superior for optimization or simulation tasks. This mismatch could erase any policy premium before meaningful revenue materializes.
"D-Wave's real risk isn't obsolescence or dilution alone—it's becoming a perpetual government contractor with no exit, burning equity while competitors race ahead."
Grok flags technical obsolescence risk for annealing, but that assumes gate-model competitors solve error correction at scale—unproven. The real trap: D-Wave could become a government-funded R&D vendor indefinitely, neither failing catastrophically nor reaching commercial escape velocity. That's worse than binary outcomes the panel is pricing. Dilution compounds this; cost-plus contracts don't prevent shareholder dilution if D-Wave needs capital raises to fund next-gen architectures.
"Strategic government procurement often prioritizes immediate deployable utility over long-term technological superiority, potentially sustaining D-Wave despite technical limitations."
Claude is right about the 'zombie R&D' risk, but everyone is ignoring the geopolitical optics. If the U.S. frames quantum as a 'Manhattan Project' level necessity, D-Wave’s annealing tech becomes a strategic asset regardless of its inferiority to gate-model systems. The government doesn't always pick the 'best' tech; they pick the one that works now. D-Wave’s existing hardware is deployable, which beats theoretical gate-model perfection in a race against China.
"Policy-driven persistence could keep annealing relevant even with gate-model advances, so obsolescence risk may be overstated."
Grok, your assertion that annealing could be technically obsolete faster than gate-models hinges on a clean tech race, which isn’t guaranteed. Government-use cases—optimization and combinatorial tasks—could keep annealing relevant even as gates improve, because deployment realities favor proven, deployable hardware. The bigger risk may be policy lock-in and procurement inertia, not a sudden technology takedown. If investors assume rapid obsolescence, they miss how a defendable government buyer could sustain a longer runway for D-Wave.
The panel consensus is bearish on D-Wave (QBTS), citing extreme valuation, long-term technical hurdles, and the risk of becoming a perpetual government-funded R&D vendor with no clear path to commercial profitability.
Geopolitical optics making D-Wave's annealing tech a strategic asset in a race against China
Becoming a government-funded R&D vendor indefinitely with no clear path to commercial profitability