Quantum Computing Patent Landscape 2026
Quantum Computing Patent Landscape in 2026
IBM holds a commanding lead with 3,073 patent families, and the top five filers together account for 38% of the hundred largest filers’ combined output, signalling high concentration among incumbents. The field is still expanding on a multi-year basis, though annual volume has eased from its 2023 peak, placing quantum computing in a maturing competitive phase.
IBM leads a concentrated field; Google and Microsoft form a distinct second tier
IBM leads the 5 times the output of Google LLC (2,003 patent families), which itself holds a clear gap over Microsoft Technology Licensing (1,002 patent families) and Origin Quantum Computing Technology (996 patent families).
The top five filers collectively hold 38% of the hundred largest filers’ combined total, a level of concentration that reflects both the capital intensity of quantum hardware development and the head-start advantages of large technology incumbents. A meaningful second tier — Northrop Grumman, Beijing Baidu, IonQ, and D-Wave — clusters between 489 and 627 patent families, suggesting that specialist and defence-oriented players have built defensible positions.
| # | Applicant | Patent families | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | International Business Machines Corporation | 3,073 | |
| 2 | Google LLC | 2,003 | |
| 3 | Microsoft Technology Licensing LLC | 1,002 | |
| 4 | Origin Quantum Computing Technology (Hefei) Co Ltd | 996 | |
| 5 | Northrop Grumman Systems Corporation | 627 | |
| 6 | BEIJING BAIDU NETCOM SCI & TECH CO LTD | 615 | |
| 7 | IonQ Inc. | 546 | |
| 8 | D-Wave Systems Inc. | 489 | |
| 9 | Fujitsu Ltd | 413 | |
| 10 | IQM Finland Oy | 410 |
| # | Applicant | Patent families | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| 11 | RIGETTI & CO INC | 395 | |
| 12 | Quantinuum LLC | 369 | |
| 13 | Tencent Technology (Shenzhen) Co Ltd | 363 | |
| 14 | PsiQuantum Corp | 342 | |
| 15 | Intel Corporation | 340 | |
| 16 | Commissariat à l’Energie Atomique et aux Energies Alternatives (CEA) | 267 | |
| 17 | Yale University | 239 | |
| 18 | Zapata Computing Inc. | 218 | |
| 19 | Massachusetts Institute of Technology | 215 | |
| 20 | PRESIDENT & FELLOWS OF HARVARD COLLEGE | 212 |
IBM’s scale implies broad freedom-to-operate risk for new entrants across multiple quantum modalities; Google’s trajectory (discussed under Players) suggests it is actively narrowing that gap. The presence of Origin Quantum Computing (Hefei) in the top four signals that Chinese industrial players are competing at a global scale in this space.
Filings from 2024 onward are subject to publication lag and are likely under-counted; the apparent softening in the most recent period should not be read as a real decline in inventive activity. Longer-window growth, applicant concentration, and technology-route coverage are therefore more reliable signals than the latest-year bar alone.
Filing volume plateaued at a high level; algorithm patents dominate the technology mix
The annual filing trend reveals a rapid build-up from 2017 to 2023 followed by a plateauing near peak levels, while the technology composition chart shows that quantum algorithm and computing-model patents (G06N) account for by far the largest share of activity, with hardware-layer classes forming a secondary cluster.
Annual filing trend
Filings grew sharply from 643 in 2017 to a peak of 3,069 in 2023, then show apparent moderation in 2024 and 2025; the 2024 and 2025 figures are substantially affected by publication lag and should be treated as floor estimates rather than a confirmed slowdown.
↗ Hover for values · click a bar to ask EurekaTechnology composition
G06N (computing based on AI and quantum models) is by far the most active class, reflecting the dominant focus on quantum algorithms and hybrid classical-quantum software. Hardware-oriented classes — B82Y (nanotechnology), H10N (solid-state devices), H01L (semiconductor devices), and H03K (pulse and logic circuits) — form a secondary cluster, indicating that physical qubit and control-electronics research remains a significant but secondary share of total output. Lower-volume classes such as H04L (digital information transmission) and G02F (optical control) mark areas where photonic and networking approaches are comparatively sparse.
↗ Hover for values · click a bar to ask EurekaHighly cited patent families surfaced by the query
Citation-heavy patent families returned by the query. Use this section as citation context, not as a curated list of the most topic-specific patents.
Superconducting qubit and preparation method there…
The present disclosure provides a superconducting qubit. The superconducting qubit includes: a Josephson junction and a non-Josephson junction area, wherein the non-Josephson junction area includes a first layer of superconducting material, the first layer of superconducting material being superconducting material deposited on the non-Josephson junction… (excerpt from the patent abstract)
| # | Patent | Citations |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Adiabatic quantum computation with superconducting… | 363 |
| 2 | Adiabatic quantum computation with superconducting… | 252 |
| 3 | Analog processor comprising quantum devices | 229 |
| 4 | Superconducting quantum-bit device based on Joseph… | 215 |
| 5 | Adiabatic quantum computation with superconducting… | 195 |
| 6 | Performing a Calibration Process in a Quantum Comp… | 194 |
| 7 | Circuits and methods of implementing time-average-… | 190 |
| 8 | Architecture for local programming of quantum proc… | 167 |
Ranked by total forward citations. Citation counts favour older and broadly cited patent families, and broad or adjacent patents may appear when they match the search scope. Treat this section as citation context, not as a curated list of the most topic-specific patents. Some patent titles may be shown in their original, non-English language where an accurate translation could not be guaranteed.
What the patent structure means for R&D investment decisions
The combination of high concentration, a maturing filing curve, active cross-institutional collaboration, and strong US-centric jurisdiction coverage together shape where competitive risk is high and where room to build differentiated positions still exists.
Field is at a plateau after rapid growth; annual volume has eased from the 2023 peak
The lifecycle evidence places quantum computing at a Maturity stage: annual filings plateaued near their 2023 peak of 3,069, and the multi-year window still reflects positive growth of 12% over the prior period. For R&D planners, this means the low-hanging algorithmic and architecture claims are increasingly crowded; new filings need to target genuinely differentiated technical approaches to avoid dense prior-art thickets.
Lifecycle: MaturityTop five hold 38% of the hundred largest filers’ combined output; three-tier structure visible
A three-tier structure is apparent: IBM alone holds over 3,000 patent families; Google, Microsoft, and Origin Quantum sit in the 1,000-2,000 range; and a mid-tier of specialist firms (IonQ, D-Wave, Rigetti, IQM Finland) holds 395-627 families each. Firms entering below tier two face significant freedom-to-operate exposure in core qubit architectures and control systems, making licensing strategy or narrow-niche differentiation essential.
High concentrationIBM’s global entity network and IonQ-university ties are the most active co-filing relationships
The most active co-filing pairs are IBM with IBM Deutschland GmbH (196 co-filings) and IBM with IBM United Kingdom (132 co-filings), reflecting coordinated multi-jurisdictional prosecution within the IBM group. IonQ has the strongest external academic links, co-filing 81 families with the University of Maryland and 57 with Duke University. IBM also co-filed 12 families with Goldman Sachs, pointing to emerging finance-sector application development.
Ecosystem co-filingUS dominates prosecution; Europe and WIPO are the main secondary routes; Asia is selectively targeted
The United States is the primary prosecution destination, followed by EPO (Europe) and WIPO (PCT) as the principal routes for international coverage. Australia, Canada, and Germany represent important secondary markets. China’s comparatively lower count in jurisdictions — despite Origin Quantum and Baidu ranking highly as applicants — suggests that Chinese domestic filings may be captured differently in the dataset. South Korea and Japan show moderate activity, indicating selective Asia-Pacific coverage strategies among leading filers.
US-centric, EPO secondaryGo beyond the landscape: Eureka’s TRIZ Solution agent breaks down an R&D problem and returns patented concept solutions, each with a technical approach and cited patent & literature evidence.
| Applicant | Collaborator | Co-filings |
|---|---|---|
| International Business Machines Corporation | IBM Deutschland GmbH | 196 |
| International Business Machines Corporation | IBM United Kingdom Ltd | 132 |
| IonQ Inc. | University of Maryland | 81 |
| IonQ Inc. | Duke University | 57 |
| International Business Machines Corporation | Goldman Sachs & Co LLC | 12 |
| International Business Machines Corporation | IBM China Co Ltd | 10 |
| RIGETTI & CO INC | RIGETTI AUSTRALIA PTY LTD | 9 |
| RIGETTI & CO INC | RIGETTI UK LTD | 7 |
| RIGETTI & CO INC | President and Fellows of Harvard College | 6 |
| International Business Machines Corporation | E.ON Digital Technology GmbH | 5 |
Co-filing pairs, ranked by the number of jointly-filed patent families.
IBM leads on scale; Google accelerating; IonQ and Rigetti growing among specialists
IBM’s position reflects decades of sustained investment across quantum algorithms and superconducting hardware. Google is the fastest-moving large-scale challenger, while IonQ and Rigetti show the strongest recent momentum among specialist hardware firms.
International Business Machines Corporation
IBM leads the ranking with 3,073 patent families, concentrated heavily in quantum computing models (G06N, 2,401 records) and solid-state/superconducting device classes (H10N, 776 records). Its recent filing momentum shows a decline of 56% against the prior three-year period, consistent with a portfolio in consolidation rather than rapid expansion — though at 677 recent families, its absolute output still exceeds most rivals’ cumulative totals. The IBM group co-files extensively through its German and UK subsidiaries, reinforcing broad jurisdictional coverage.
patent families: 3,073Google LLC
Google ranks second with 2,003 patent families and is the only top-three player showing positive recent momentum, up 17% versus the prior period, with 657 recent families. Its technology emphasis mirrors IBM in quantum computing models (G06N, 1,663 records) but extends into solid-state device innovation (H10N, 259 records) and classical computing models (G06N20, 168 records), reflecting its superconducting qubit program. Google’s trajectory suggests it is actively narrowing the gap with IBM in absolute portfolio scale.
patent families: 2,003| Applicant | Recent (3 yrs) | Trend |
|---|---|---|
| International Business Machines Corporation | 677 | ▼ -56% |
| Google LLC | 657 | ▲ +17% |
| Microsoft Technology Licensing LLC | 233 | ▼ -51% |
| IonQ Inc. | 262 | ▲ +31% |
| D-Wave Systems Inc. | 76 | ▼ -55% |
| Northrop Grumman Systems Corporation | 11 | ▼ -90% |
| RIGETTI & CO INC | 153 | ▲ +24% |
| IQM Finland Oy | 122 | ▼ -36% |
Under-served adjacent branches in quantum hardware interfaces and photonics
Several IPC classes adjacent to the dominant quantum algorithm core show comparatively lower filing shares, suggesting they are less saturated relative to their technical relevance to quantum computing system integration.
H04L · Digital information transmission for quantum networks
H04L appears at a 2% share of patent records among the top branches — sparse relative to the algorithm-dominant G06N class — despite being directly relevant to quantum key distribution, quantum networking protocols, and hybrid classical-quantum communication stacks. The technical case for investment is strong given growing interest in quantum-secure communications; entry paths include co-development with telecom or cybersecurity players already active in H04L.
Search this in Eureka →G02F · Optical control and modulation for photonic qubits
G02F (optical control and modulation) has 521 patent records in the dataset, a notably low share given that photonic quantum computing is one of the main competing qubit modalities pursued by PsiQuantum and others. The relative sparsity may reflect the early-stage nature of photonic IP or concentration in a small number of filers; teams working on integrated photonic qubit platforms or modulators for quantum repeaters could find less crowded claim space here than in superconducting device classes.
Search this in Eureka →How leading filers differ in their technology route emphasis
Strength of each leader across the main technology routes.
| Player | G06N 10 · Computing based on AI models | B82Y 10 · Nanotechnology applications | H10N 60 · Other electric solid-state devices | H10N 69 · Other electric solid-state devices | H03K 19 · Pulse technique & logic circuits |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| International Business Machines Corporation | Strong · 2,401 | Emerging · 323 | Moderate · 776 | Moderate · 508 | Emerging · 194 |
| Google LLC | Strong · 1,663 | Emerging · 110 | Emerging · 259 | Emerging · 126 | Emerging · 111 |
| Microsoft Technology Licensing LLC | Strong · 817 | Emerging · 135 | Emerging · 156 | Emerging · 102 | Emerging · 60 |
| D-Wave Systems Inc. | Strong · 352 | Moderate · 146 | Moderate · 124 | Emerging · 60 | Emerging · 59 |
| Rigetti & Co Inc. | Strong · 338 | Moderate · 163 | Emerging · 48 | Emerging · 46 | Moderate · 72 |
| IonQ Inc. | Strong · 492 | Absent | Absent | Absent | Absent |
| IQM Finland Oy | Strong · 312 | Absent | Moderate · 74 | Moderate · 90 | Absent |
Frequently asked questions
The corpus covers 18,593 patent families in scope globally, reflecting activity across hardware, algorithms, error correction, and quantum communication.
International Business Machines Corporation (IBM) leads with 3,073 patent families, nearly 1.5 times the output of the second-ranked filer, Google LLC, which holds 2,003 patent families.
Annual filings grew rapidly from 643 in 2017 to a peak of 3,069 in 2023. The field is still expanding on a multi-year basis — the recent window shows 12% growth — though annual volume has eased from the 2023 peak, placing the field in a maturity stage. Data for 2024 and 2025 are subject to publication lag and are likely under-counted.
The United States is the primary prosecution destination, followed by EPO (Europe) and WIPO (PCT) as the leading routes for international coverage. Australia, Canada, and Germany are significant secondary markets, with South Korea and Japan showing moderate activity.
Among the players with available momentum data, Google is up 17% and IonQ is up 31% in recent filings versus the prior equivalent period. Rigetti is also growing at 24%. By contrast, IBM’s recent filings are down 56% and Microsoft’s are down 51% from their prior period peaks, consistent with portfolio consolidation.
G06N (computing based on AI and quantum models) is by far the dominant class, reflecting the central role of quantum algorithms and software. Secondary hardware-layer classes include B82Y (nanotechnology applications), H10N (solid-state devices), H01L (semiconductor devices), and H03K (pulse technique and logic circuits), collectively reflecting superconducting and other qubit platform research.
Ready to map your own quantum computing patent landscape?
Join 18,000+ innovators using PatSnap Eureka to map any technology landscape: search 2B+ patents and papers, surface key assignees, and generate a report like this in minutes.
Disclaimer. This page is generated from PatSnap Eureka data drawn from a limited snapshot of global patent and scientific-literature records, and is provided for general information and reference only.
Patent data carries inherent limitations: recent filings (typically the most recent 18–24 months) are under-counted due to standard publication lag; counts may be reported at either a patent-family or a patent-record basis and are not always directly comparable; classification, applicant-name, and citation data may contain errors, duplicates, or omissions; and the underlying search query defines and constrains the scope shown. As a result, the analysis may be incomplete or inaccurate and may not reflect the full technology landscape.
Nothing on this page constitutes an exhaustive prior-art, novelty, freedom-to-operate, or validity search, nor does it constitute legal, financial, investment, or professional advice, and it should not be relied upon as such. Any patent, commercial, or strategic decision should be verified independently and reviewed with qualified patent, legal, and domain professionals. PatSnap makes no warranties, express or implied, as to the accuracy, completeness, or fitness for any particular purpose of the information presented.