Beyond the Qubit

Who will win the quantum computing race? It is one of the biggest questions facing quantum investors. But what if there is another way to approach the opportunity?In Part 2 of my Beyond the Qubit conversation with Yvonne Greeuw from Invest-NL, we discuss the investment thesis behind QuantWare and why solving a critical bottleneck can be a powerful way to build a business in an emerging industry. Rather than simply betting on which company will build the best quantum computer, investors can ask a different question: what will every scaled quantum system need, and who is building that capability today?We explore the Dutch quantum ecosystem, the role of government funding and private investors, and the challenges quantum companies face as they move from research toward commercial value. We also discuss what makes a technology company defensible, how investors think about returns and exits, and what needs to happen before quantum computers deliver useful applications.For deep-tech founders and investors, the key takeaway is that a bottleneck is only an opportunity if it matters, is difficult to solve, and allows a company to build a lasting position in the value chain.💡 In this episode, we cover:Why investors do not always need to predict the ultimate quantum computing winnerThe investment thesis behind QuantWare and its role in the quantum value chainHow the Netherlands built a strong quantum research and startup ecosystemWhy universities, governments, and private investors each play a different roleWhy quantum startups need private lead investors to help unlock further capitalHow to identify bottlenecks that could become defensible businessesWhat investors look for in technology, intellectual property, talent, and commercial potentialWhy exit strategy and returns matter in long-term deep-tech investingWhich industries could benefit from useful quantum computingWhat the timeline toward useful quantum computers and logical qubits might look likeChapters00:00 - Which Dutch quantum companies could become global leaders?03:00 - Why the Netherlands built a strong quantum ecosystem05:00 - The role of universities, talent, and entrepreneurship08:00 - What the Dutch quantum ecosystem still needs to improve10:00 - The investment thesis behind QuantWare12:00 - Why quantum startups need private lead investors15:00 - The capital required to build quantum companies17:00 - Foundries, technology choices, and competitive positioning20:00 - How Invest-NL helps mobilize private capital23:00 - Investment horizons, exits, and returns25:00 - Building a defensible position in the quantum value chain28:00 - Learning from the strengths of the European quantum ecosystem30:00 - Which industries could benefit from quantum computing?31:00 - What successful quantum investment looks like33:00 - The path toward useful quantum applications35:00 - Timelines for quantum computing and logical qubits36:40 - The Netherlands' ambition for industrial quantum leadershipEnjoyed the conversation? Share it with someone working in quantum computing, deep tech, or venture capital. Subscribe to Beyond the Qubit for more conversations about the companies, technologies, and investment decisions shaping the quantum industry.Disclaimer: This post is shared on a personal basis. I do not represent any company. This is not investment advice.

Before a quantum scale-up raises its next €50 million, one question matters: what exactly needs to become true with that money?In Part 1 of my Beyond the Qubit conversation with Yvonne Greeuw from Invest-NL, we discuss how investors evaluate deep-tech companies beyond the technology itself. Yvonne explains how they think about investment theses, key milestones, commercial validation, and the progress a company needs to make before its next financing round.One idea stood out: do not blindly optimize for KPIs. A company can hit its targets and still be working on the wrong things. For quantum computing startups, the critical milestone might be proving manufacturability, securing a reference customer, or showing that a technology can solve a meaningful problem for end users.We also explore the Dutch quantum ecosystem, different quantum computing modalities, the transition from research to commercial products, and what investors look for as companies mature. For founders and investors, the challenge is not simply to measure progress. It is to identify which achievements will materially strengthen the investment case.💡 In this episode, we cover:How Invest-NL evaluates deep-tech investment opportunitiesWhy a strong investment thesis starts with identifying the real bottleneckWhat value inflection points mean for a company's next funding roundWhy founders should not optimize blindly for KPIsHow quantum startups can move from technical progress to commercial validationWhy qubit counts alone do not tell the full storyHow different quantum computing modalities affect investment decisionsWhat changes when a startup moves from early-stage funding toward Series A and Series BWhy investor conversations should focus on the risks that need to be removedHow to think about the next €50 million as a set of milestones, not just more runwayChapters00:00 - Meet Yvonne Greeuw from Invest-NL02:00 - What Invest-NL does and how it evaluates companies04:00 - Building an investment thesis around the real bottleneck06:00 - Evaluating technology and the opportunity it creates08:00 - Testing assumptions and validating the investment case10:00 - The role of people, communication, and alignment14:00 - Keeping founders and stakeholders aligned as things change16:00 - When a company's original investment thesis needs to change18:00 - Strengthening the investment thesis with evidence20:00 - Invest-NL and the Dutch quantum ecosystem24:00 - Building the quantum ecosystem around startups26:00 - Evaluating different quantum computing modalities29:00 - Learning from experts and market analysis31:00 - Moving from research progress toward end-user relevance34:00 - What changes as a company approaches Series B36:00 - Technical challenges and the path toward useful quantum systems38:00 - Quantum hardware, infrastructure, and scaling challenges41:00 - What creates a durable competitive advantage44:00 - Common mistakes founders make when speaking to investors46:00 - Pitching as a commercial strategy48:00 - Why rejection does not always mean the company is wrong50:00 - Defining milestones across technology, commercial progress, and team51:00 - Why founders should not blindly optimize for KPIs52:00 - Preparing a company for institutional investmentIf you work in quantum computing, deep tech, or venture capital, share this episode with someone thinking about how to turn technical progress into a stronger investment case.Subscribe to Beyond the Qubit for more conversations about the technologies, companies, and investment decisions shaping the quantum industry.Disclaimer: This post is shared on a personal basis. I do not represent any company. This is not investment advice.

What could make a cryo-CMOS company difficult to replace, even if a competitor develops a technically better chip?In Part 2 of my Beyond the Qubit conversation with Eric W. Cao, Co-Founder and CEO of Qifrost, we explore what could separate the winners in the growing cryo-CMOS market. Beyond intellectual property and chip performance, the discussion turns to execution, hard-to-find engineering talent, customer qualification, and the challenge of getting cryogenic control technology out of the lab and into real quantum systems.We also discuss why the next 24 months could be important for identifying the leaders in cryogenic control electronics, how different quantum computing architectures shape demand, and what commercial progress might look like. For investors, the key question is whether a company can turn technical expertise into a solution that customers can deploy, trust, and keep using.💡 In this episode, we cover:Why cryo-CMOS could become essential to scaling quantum computersWhat may differentiate Qifrost from foundries, instrument companies, and other competitorsWhy cryo-CMOS engineering talent is so difficult to findWhy laboratory results are not enough to prove a commercial solutionHow quantum computing architectures influence cryogenic control requirementsWhy the next 24 months could reveal early market leadersThe role of 4K electronics, multiplexing, packaging, and reducing fridge cablingWhy engineering contracts, design agreements, and commercial milestones matterWhat investors should look for when evaluating progress in quantum hardware infrastructureChapters00:00 - Why Qifrost could win in cryo-CMOS02:00 - The shortage of cryo-CMOS engineering talent04:00 - What separates Qifrost from potential competitors08:00 - Why lab validation is not enough10:00 - Different technologies and the cryo-CMOS opportunity12:00 - Which quantum computing architectures need cryo-CMOS14:00 - Why market leaders could emerge in the next 24 months16:00 - Multiplexing and scaling quantum control18:00 - Platform agnostic technology and quantum modalities20:00 - Quantum benchmarking and industry validation22:00 - What the 4K control layer can do24:00 - Hybrid bonding, packaging, and integration25:00 - Why engineering contracts matter to investors27:00 - What it takes to become a market leader32:00 - Commercial milestones and proving progress34:00 - Reducing cabling without sacrificing qubit fidelityIf you follow quantum computing, cryo-CMOS, or deep-tech investing, share this episode with someone who would find it useful. Subscribe to Beyond the Qubit for more conversations about the companies, technologies, and business models shaping the quantum industry.Disclaimer: This post is shared on a personal basis. I do not represent any company. This is not investment advice.

The cryo-CMOS market may still look early. But the leaders may already be starting to emerge.In this episode, I explore my biggest takeaways from my Beyond the Qubit interview with Eric W. Cao, Co-Founder and CEO of Qifrost. Eric believes the scaling bottleneck that cryo-CMOS aims to solve could become critical around 2030, give or take a couple of years. But companies cannot wait until then to prepare. The next 24 months could be when the leaders begin to separate themselves from the rest of the market.This episode is for investors, founders, and anyone trying to understand where value may emerge in the quantum hardware supply chain. Cryo-CMOS aims to address the scaling challenges of controlling quantum processors at cryogenic temperatures. But laboratory validation is only the first step. The next challenge is proving that the technology works inside commercial quantum processing units, alongside real architectures and roadmaps.That is what makes Qifrost interesting. The progression is clear: laboratory validation, commercial validation, standardization, and eventually mass manufacturing. The race may not be won by the company with the most impressive laboratory demonstration, but by the one that integrates its technology with commercial quantum hardware first.💡 In this episode, we cover:Why cryo-CMOS could become a critical quantum scaling technologyWhy the next 24 months may help determine the market leadersHow cryogenic control electronics could reduce wiring complexityWhy laboratory validation is no longer enoughHow commercial validation differs from proving technology in the labWhy co-development with quantum processor companies mattersHow standardization and mass manufacturing fit into the roadmapWhat investors should watch as Qifrost moves toward commercial adoptionChapters00:00 Why Qifrost matters for quantum investors01:00 Why existing quantum control infrastructure will not scale02:30 Why the next 24 months matter for cryo-CMOS04:30 From laboratory validation to commercial validation11:00 The physical scaling bottleneck in quantum hardware36:30 Why cryo-CMOS is a strategic opportunity43:00 Why commercial execution matters more than the technology alone65:30 Building relationships with quantum hardware developers72:30 What it takes to prove cryo-CMOS commerciallyShare this episode with someone investing in or building in quantum, and subscribe or follow Beyond the Qubit for more conversations on quantum technology, markets, and investing.📌 Disclaimer:This is not investment advice.This post is shared on a personal basis and I do not represent any company.

The most important scaling unit in quantum may not be the qubit.It may be the tile.In this episode, I continue my conversation with James, CEO of Quantum Motion, to explore why the company’s tile architecture could change how investors think about quantum scaling. Most quantum discussions start with qubit count. But the semiconductor industry taught us a different lesson: scaling happens when you prove the repeating building block and then replicate it.That is the idea behind Quantum Motion’s tile architecture.A tile is not just a place where qubits sit. It is designed as a functional unit containing the key ingredients needed for a scalable architecture: shuttling, readout, single-qubit operations, and interfaces for interactions between neighbouring tiles.This episode is for investors, founders, and anyone trying to understand why manufacturability may matter more than impressive qubit numbers. The question is not only whether Quantum Motion can make more qubits. It is whether they can prove a manufacturable tile that can be repeated at scale.Because if the tile works, the scaling problem changes.It moves from invention risk toward replication risk.💡 In this episode, we cover:Why the tile may be more important than raw qubit countHow semiconductor scaling principles apply to quantum computingWhy a repeatable building block changes the scaling challengeWhat Quantum Motion’s tile architecture containsWhy manufacturing yield and control are criticalHow shuttling and readout fit into the architectureWhy the TV pixel analogy helps explain quantum scalingWhat investors should watch beyond qubit numbersChapters00:00 Why qubit count may not be the right metric00:41 Manufacturing yield as a key KPI02:37 Why control is the real bottleneck05:26 The quantum tile architecture explained17:12 The TV pixel analogy for quantum scaling27:32 Shuttling, readout and the functional tile31:00 Why replication could change the scaling equationShare this episode with someone investing in or building in quantum, and subscribe or follow Beyond the Qubit for more conversations on quantum technology, markets, and investing.📌 Disclaimer:This is not investment advice.This post is shared on a personal basis and I do not represent any company.

The real spin-qubit question is not:Can you make one?It is:Can you control millions?In this episode, I explore my biggest takeaways from my Beyond the Qubit interview with James, CEO of Quantum Motion. Spin qubits have one of the most interesting scaling stories in quantum because they build on something the semiconductor industry already understands: CMOS manufacturing.But CMOS does not make quantum easy.It changes where the hard problem sits.Instead of removing complexity, spin qubits move the challenge toward control, tuning, automation, and manufacturing. A single electron spin can hold quantum information, but scaling that into a useful quantum computer means controlling millions of slightly different qubits with high precision.This episode is for investors, founders, and anyone trying to understand why semiconductor-style manufacturing could matter in quantum. Quantum Motion’s approach is built around making qubits fit the factory from day one. The question is not only whether spin qubits work. It is whether they can become manufactured systems.Density creates the opportunity.Control determines whether it becomes a computer.💡 In this episode, we cover:Why spin qubits are attractive from a semiconductor perspectiveHow CMOS manufacturing changes the quantum scaling challengeWhy millions of qubits create a control problemWhy manufacturing discipline matters for quantum computersHow automation and scalable readout become criticalWhy Quantum Motion started with a 300mm CMOS approachWhy density alone does not create a useful quantum computerWhat investors should watch in spin-qubit platformsChapters00:00 Why Quantum Motion and spin qubits matter01:12 Why CMOS is the foundation of the strategy03:18 Why semiconductor manufacturing creates an advantage05:10 The challenge of manufacturing quantum devices11:12 Why controlling millions of qubits is the real problem12:17 Why scalable readout matters17:34 Why yield and automation determine success27:34 Why 300mm CMOS matters for quantum scaling31:28 From individual qubits to scalable systemsShare this episode with someone investing in or building in quantum, and subscribe or follow Beyond the Qubit for more conversations on quantum technology, markets, and investing.📌 Disclaimer:This is not investment advice.This post is shared on a personal basis and I do not represent any company.

The quantum technology worked.Then the real problems started.In this episode, I continue my conversation with Ingrid Romijn from Falqon® Systems to explore what happens when deep tech moves from demonstration into real-world deployment. One of my biggest takeaways was that the hardest problems often appear after the technology works.For Falqon®, the challenge was no longer simply whether quantum key distribution works. The challenge became integration: how do you connect quantum security technology with existing infrastructure, telecom networks, fibre providers, and customer security systems?This episode is for investors, founders, and anyone trying to understand how deep-tech companies move from technology development to commercial adoption. Real customers create real constraints. Government deployments push reliability requirements. Telecom customers push deployability. Enterprise users demand visibility into performance and operations.That customer feedback loop is where companies mature.The strategic question is not only whether a technology works.It is:How quickly can each customer make the next deployment easier?💡 In this episode, we cover:Why real-world deployment creates new bottlenecks after the technology worksWhat Falqon® Systems learned from customer deploymentsHow the Port of Rotterdam exposed integration challengesWhy quantum security needs to work with existing infrastructureHow customer requirements shaped the Quantum Domain ControllerWhy telecom customers care about deployability and operationsWhy early customers become part of the innovation engineHow field experience can become a long-term competitive advantageChapters00:00 Why deployment creates new challenges01:27 The Port of Rotterdam customer lesson02:50 Integrating quantum keys into existing infrastructure12:16 Learning from early customer deployments15:13 Building the Quantum Domain Controller31:13 What customers need to trust the system34:00 Why customer feedback creates a competitive moatShare this episode with someone investing in or building in quantum, and subscribe or follow Beyond the Qubit for more conversations on quantum technology, markets, and investing.📌 Disclaimer:This is not investment advice.This post is shared on a personal basis and I do not represent any company.

Europe is focused on which cryptography to use.But the bigger question may be:Who controls it?In this episode, I explore my biggest takeaways from my conversation with Ingrid Romijn of Falqon® Systems and why post-quantum security is not only a cryptography question. Moving from vulnerable cryptography to quantum-safe solutions does not automatically create technological sovereignty. The question is also who controls the implementation, key management, orchestration, and security infrastructure around it.This episode is for investors, founders, and anyone trying to understand the emerging quantum security market. Ingrid explains why the future may not be about choosing only one technology. A layered approach combining post-quantum cryptography, QKD where appropriate, and existing security infrastructure may become the more realistic path.That creates a new strategic layer: the control plane. As quantum security becomes more complex, the companies that can manage and orchestrate different technologies may become just as important as the companies building individual components.The investor question is not only:Who creates the cryptography?It is also:Who controls how the entire security stack works together?💡 In this episode, we cover:Why quantum security is also a sovereignty questionWhy adopting post-quantum cryptography does not automatically remove dependenciesHow PQC, QKD, and existing cryptography can work togetherWhy key management and orchestration could become strategic layersHow Falqon® Systems is moving beyond QKD hardwareWhy control planes may become valuable in quantum securityThe role of European technology independenceWhere investors should look for value in the quantum security stackChapters00:00 Why quantum security is a sovereignty question02:08 Why Europe matters in the quantum security landscape04:28 Building infrastructure for quantum-safe communications08:20 Why Falqon moved beyond QKD hardware09:08 Combining QKD, PQC, and PKI11:41 Why the control plane matters18:13 The future of quantum key management29:10 Why orchestration may become the strategic layerShare this episode with someone investing in or building in quantum, and subscribe or follow Beyond the Qubit for more conversations on quantum technology, markets, and investing.📌 Disclaimer:This is not investment advice.This post is shared on a personal basis and I do not represent any company.

Transduction is “everybody’s problem and nobody’s problem.”That line from Vijoy Pandey, SVP/GM of Outshift by Cisco, stayed with me after Part 2 of my Beyond the Qubit interview because it points to one of the most important value layers in quantum.In this episode, I explore why connecting quantum computers may become just as important as building them. In classical networking, information can be inspected, routed, and forwarded. Quantum information is different. If you inspect the quantum state, you risk destroying the information you are trying to preserve.This episode is for investors, founders, and anyone trying to understand the infrastructure that quantum computing will need to scale. The challenge is not only building better qubits. It is creating the interfaces, switches, and protocols that allow different quantum systems to communicate.That is where transduction becomes strategically important. It is the translation layer between quantum computers and quantum networks. Without it, the industry risks creating isolated compute islands where every system speaks its own language.Cisco’s approach is interesting because it is not built around betting on one winning quantum modality. Instead, the focus is on building a network layer that can connect different architectures. If quantum becomes a distributed computing platform, the companies controlling the interfaces and connectivity layers could become important control points.💡 In this episode, we cover:Why quantum networks cannot copy classical internet architectureWhy transduction is the interface problem between quantum computers and networksHow quantum switches differ from classical switchesWhy different quantum modalities create a connectivity challengeHow Cisco’s universal quantum switch approaches translation between encodingsWhy ecosystem collaboration matters for quantum networkingWhy the network layer could become a valuable control pointWhat investors should watch as quantum infrastructure developsChapters00:00 Why transduction matters in quantum networking01:35 Why quantum needs a network layer02:39 The NIC card analogy for quantum03:24 Why transduction is harder than classical networking04:51 Why quantum networks cannot inspect information07:05 Building a universal quantum switch08:45 Translating different quantum encodings10:48 Why ecosystem collaboration matters12:47 Keeping the network simple and complexity at the edge14:48 Why transduction could become a strategic control pointShare this episode with someone investing in or building in quantum, and subscribe or follow Beyond the Qubit for more conversations on quantum technology, markets, and investing.📌 Disclaimer:This is not investment advice.This post is shared on a personal basis and I do not represent any company.

The internet was built by reading packet headers.Quantum networks cannot do that.In this episode, I explore my biggest takeaways from Part 1 of my Beyond the Qubit interview with Vijoy Pandey, head of Outshift at Cisco. The key difference is simple but profound: classical networks scale by inspecting and forwarding information, while quantum networks have to preserve information they cannot directly inspect.This episode is for investors, founders, and anyone trying to understand what infrastructure quantum computing will need beyond the QPU itself. If quantum systems are going to scale beyond isolated machines, they will need a network layer that can connect processors, sensors, and resources while preserving fragile quantum states.Cisco’s approach is interesting because the company is not trying to build the quantum computer itself. It is exploring the networking layer around quantum systems, using photonics, telecom frequencies, room-temperature components, and existing fiber infrastructure. The goal is not to recreate the classical internet, but to build the architecture needed for quantum scale.The strategic question is not only who builds the best qubits.It is also:Who builds the network that connects them?💡 In this episode, we cover:Why quantum networks cannot simply copy classical internet architectureWhy quantum information cannot be inspected like classical packetsHow quantum switches and entanglement sources could enable scalingWhy networking between QPUs may become a major bottleneckWhy Cisco is focusing on the infrastructure layer around quantum computersHow photonics and existing fiber infrastructure could improve deployabilityWhy quantum networks may also connect sensors and shared resourcesWhat investors should watch in the quantum networking stackChapters00:00 Why Cisco is exploring quantum networking00:50 Why quantum needs a network layer03:22 Quantum clusters and the need for connectivity04:47 What quantum networking actually means05:23 The quantum switch challenge08:01 Why classical networking cannot be copied10:03 Why quantum networks cannot inspect information12:29 Building networks without destroying quantum states14:42 Why Cisco focuses on photonics and fiber17:39 Connecting quantum computers and sensors27:14 The current state of quantum networkingShare this episode with someone investing in or building in quantum, and subscribe or follow Beyond the Qubit for more conversations on quantum technology, markets, and investing.📌 Disclaimer: This is not investment advice. This post is shared on a personal basis and I do not represent any company.