Developing a systematic view of where quantum computers will outperform classical ones is important for researchers, policy makers and business leaders. But developing such a view is challenging because quantum advantage analyses depend not only on algorithm properties, but also on a host of technical characteristics (error correction, gate speeds, etc.). Because various analyses make different assumptions about these technical characteristics, it can be challenging to make comparisons across them. In this paper, we introduce an openaccess web-tool designed to make such comparisons easy. Built on the framework introduced by Choi, Moses, and Thompson (2023), it calculates when quantum systems will outperform classical computers for a given algorithmic problem. These estimates can be easily updated based on various assumptions for error correction, overhead, and connectivity. Different hardware roadmaps can also be used and algorithm running times can be customized to particular applications. It can currently be accessed at https://futuretech.mit.edu/quantum-economic-advantage-calculator. This integrated prediction tool also allows us to explore which technical factors are most important for quantum “economic” advantage (outperforming on a cost-equivalent basis). Overall, we find that for some algorithms (e.g. Shor's) the timing of advantage is quite robust, whereas for others (e.g. Grover's) it is contingent, with numerous technical characteristics substantially impacting these dates. In the paper, we discuss both why this occurs and what we can learn from it.
Developing a systematic view of where quantum computers will outperform classical ones is important for researchers, policy makers and business leaders. But developing such a view is challenging because quantum advantage analyses depend not only on algorithm properties, but also on a host of technical characteristics (error correction, gate speeds, etc.). Because various analyses make different assumptions about these technical characteristics, it can be challenging to make comparisons across them. In this paper, we introduce an openaccess web-tool designed to make such comparisons easy. Built on the framework introduced by Choi, Moses, and Thompson (2023), it calculates when quantum systems will outperform classical computers for a given algorithmic problem. These estimates can be easily updated based on various assumptions for error correction, overhead, and connectivity. Different hardware roadmaps can also be used and algorithm running times can be customized to particular applications. It can currently be accessed at https://futuretech.mit.edu/quantum-economic-advantage-calculator. This integrated prediction tool also allows us to explore which technical factors are most important for quantum “economic” advantage (outperforming on a cost-equivalent basis). Overall, we find that for some algorithms (e.g. Shor's) the timing of advantage is quite robust, whereas for others (e.g. Grover's) it is contingent, with numerous technical characteristics substantially impacting these dates. In the paper, we discuss both why this occurs and what we can learn from it.
We developed a quantum-advantage predictor tool which uses machine learning models to determine when and at what cost a computational problem can be feasibly executed on gate-based quantum computers. We trained the models on data from Quantum Resource Estimators. Our ML-based tool aims at demonstrating a more realistic calculation of running times by considering not only QRE results but also the classical computational effort in running circuits into a quantum hardware (e.g., transpilation, algorithm preparation, solution encoding/decoding, etc.). The proposed tool is divided into two main sections: advantage may happen based on by year or by hardware evolutions for a determined problem and hardware specification. In both sections, a user can select a set of input parameters to verify the resulting runtimes and costs of quantum and classical parts to determine if quantum advantage will be achievable. Our application demonstrates that, despite limited information from vendors, we can still obtain accurate predictions to determine the realization of quantum advantage.
Quantum computing represents one of the most disruptive technological paradigms of the 21st century, with profound implications for economic modelling, financial optimization, and computational decision-making. Unlike classical computing, quantum systems leverage superposition, entanglement, and interference to solve problems of exponentially higher complexity, a capability with transformative potential for economics and finance. This study examines the intersection of quantum computing and economics, systematically evaluating both the promises and the barriers defining this emerging field. Regarding opportunities, quantum algorithms, such as the Quantum Approximate Optimization Algorithm (QAOA) and Grover's algorithm, demonstrate significant theoretical advantages in portfolio optimization, risk assessment, option pricing, and the resolution of large-scale combinatorial problems that are intractable for classical machines. Quantum machine learning extends these prospects, offering accelerated capabilities for pattern recognition and predictive modelling relevant to financial markets. However, substantial barriers temper these expectations. Current quantum hardware operates in the NISQ (Noisy Intermediate-Scale Quantum) era, where decoherence, gate errors, and a limited number of qubits constrain practical applicability. The gap between theoretical quantum advantage and real-world economic implementation remains significant, compounded by a shortage of specialists, high infrastructure costs, and the absence of standardized programming frameworks tailored to economic applications. Through a bibliometric analysis of existing literature and a critical review of recent experimental results, the study maps the current state of quantum computing adoption in economics, identifies the most active research frontiers—quantum game theory and quantum portfolio optimization—and outlines the conditions under which quantum advantage could become economically relevant. The findings suggest that, although quantum computing will not transform economic practice in the short term, its long-term disruptive potential warrants proactive engagement from economists, financial institutions, and policymakers.
Quantum computing has been rapidly evolving as a field, with innovations driven by industry, academia, and government institutions. The technology has the potential to accelerate computation for solving complex problems across multiple industrial sectors. Finance and economics, with many problems exhibiting computationally heavy requirements, comprise a high-profile sector where quantum computing could have a significant impact. Therefore, it is important to identify and understand to what extent the technology could find utility in the sector. This technical review is written for quantum applications researchers, quantitative analysts in finance and economics, and researchers in related mathematical sciences. It is divided into two parts: (i) a survey of quantum algorithms pertinent to problems in finance and economics, and (ii) mapping of several use cases in the sector to the potential quantum algorithms presented in part (i). We discuss some challenges on the pathway to achieving quantum advantage. Ultimately, this review aims to be a catalyst for interdisciplinary research that will accelerate the advent of the practical advantages of quantum technologies to solve complex problems in this sector.
Quantum computing aims to outperform classical computers for some specific calculations. It relies on the additional resources given by the qubit superposition states, which can be used to design more efficiently. Reversibility of quantum computation may help in solving NP problems, which are easy in one direction but hard in the opposite sense. Quantum computers can enhance data processing and analysis tasks. The potential impact of quantum algorithms on optimization problems, simulation of quantum systems, and machine learning tasks such as clustering and classification. It also includes efforts to standardize quantum hardware and software interfaces, enabling interoperability and accelerating the adoption of quantum computing. The barriers we face while adopting Quantum computing are the accuracy of the information, lack of technical experts, and organizational interest in adopting the new process. We find one more critical barrier is the lack of standards of secure communication techniques while adopting quantum computing. While numerous challenges lie ahead, the promise of quantum computing in solving complex problems and driving innovation is too significant to ignore. We will examine the existing quantum algorithms and applications that have demonstrated quantum advantage or potential utility in various domains. The quantum computing field is expected to transition from physical qubits to error-corrected logical qubits. AI is likely to be unleashed by quantum computing for formidable progress advances in speed, cost, and algorithm learning function. Quantum computing solves one or two problems, with little practical use, and costs a fortune to run. Additionally, we will assess the challenges associated with scaling up quantum systems, addressing the issues of quantum coherence, error correction, and noise reduction.
Quantum algorithms are often represented in terms of quantum circuits operating on ideal (logical) qubits. However, the practical implementation of these algorithms poses significant challenges. Many quantum algorithms require a substantial number of logical qubits, and the inherent susceptibility to errors of quantum computers require quantum error correction. The integration of error correction introduces overhead in terms of both space (physical qubits required) and runtime (how long the algorithm needs to be run for). This paper addresses the complexity of comparing classical and quantum algorithms, primarily stemming from the additional quantum error correction overhead. We propose a comprehensive framework that facilitates a direct and meaningful comparison between classical and quantum algorithms. By acknowledging and addressing the challenges introduced by quantum error correction, our framework aims to provide a clearer understanding of the comparative performance of classical and quantum computing approaches. This work contributes to understanding the practical viability and potential advantages of quantum algorithms in real-world applications. We apply our framework to quantum cryptanalysis, since it is well known that quantum algorithms can break factoring and discrete logarithm based cryptography and weaken symmetric cryptography and hash functions. In order to estimate the real-world impact of these attacks, apart from tracking the development of fault-tolerant quantum computers it is important to have an estimate of the resources needed to implement these quantum attacks. This analysis provides state-of-the art snap-shot estimates of the realistic costs of implementing quantum attacks on these important cryptographic algorithms, assuming quantum fault-tolerance is achieved using surface code methods, and spanning a range of potential error rates. These estimates serve as a guide for gauging the realistic impact of these algorithms and for benchmarking the impact of future advances in quantum algorithms, circuit synthesis and optimization, fault-tolerance methods and physical error rates.
Quantum advantage is when quantum computers can outperform classical computers.One of the first largescale demonstrations of quantum advantage was recently done by Google running random multi-qubit quantum circuits.While Google's quantum computer took 200 seconds, calculations show that the then-fastest classical supercomputer would have taken 10000 years.Since then, different groups have claimed quantum advantage through other quantum systems.This paper will cover why quantum computers can be faster than classical computers by covering the primary differences between classical computing and quantum computing.Then, we will investigate the Deutsch-Jozsa quantum algorithm and Google's claim of quantum advantage.We will review current research regarding "quantum advantage," tying these events to the use cases covered.Additionally, different quantum algorithms that are theoretically faster than any current quantum algorithms will be analyzed, and we will delve into why this is the case.The covered examples will show methods used to improve quantum computers to provide a significant time difference to achieve a quantum advantage.After that, we make predictions concerning two critical quantum hardware limitations.Finally, we will investigate what the future of quantum advantage entails and some future cases of quantum advantage.