IonQ vs. Rigetti Computing: Which Pure-Play Quantum Pioneer Has the Stronger Technology Advantage?

In the quantum computing investment sector, two popular stock picks are IonQ (NYSE: IONQ) and Rigetti Computing (NASDAQ: RGTI). Both of these quantum computing upstarts have a long way to go before becoming a viable investment option. However, by looking at their respective technologies, investors can get an idea as to which company has a better chance of reaching the finish line.

Let's take a look at these two and see which is the better stock pick.

Image source: Getty Images.

IonQ is taking the road less traveled

The primary way most companies do quantum computing is via superconducting. This involves cooling a particle in a chamber to near absolute zero temperatures so it can be controlled for the purposes of quantum computing. Rigetti utilizes this technique, but that's also the same process that many of the legacy tech companies are using. That may prove to be a problem, as Rigetti is competing against some heavyweights with huge resources.

IonQ is taking a far different approach. There's really nobody else doing what IonQ is doing, which could be good or bad. Instead of cooling a chamber, IonQ uses lasers to pinpoint and cool a particle, then utilizes an ion trap that's similar to a maze to trap the particle and utilize it for quantum computing purposes. This yields superior accuracy, but at the cost of processing speed.

The typical accuracy measurement utilized by companies in the quantum computing industry is the 2-qubit gate fidelity test. This measures whether a calculation is still accurate after passing through two logic gates, and is done multiple times to compile a score. Rigetti's most advanced 108-qubit computer achieved a 99.1% 2-qubit gate fidelity score. Meanwhile, IonQ's score totaled 99.99% in a 256-qubit system.

Larger qubit systems tend to be less accurate, so the fact that IonQ did this on a larger system than Rigetti also makes it more impressive. Furthermore, even though the difference between these two scores looks small, it's actually astronomical. So, the technology advantage IonQ has over Rigetti is massive, at least from an accuracy standpoint.

However, IonQ's products prioritize accuracy over speed, and that's where a superconducting approach, like Rigetti's, shines. Yet if quantum computing cannot be accurate, it's not all that useful. Speed will be something that comes later on in the quantum computing world, so that puts IonQ at an advantage over Rigetti to begin with.

But that's not the only advantage IonQ has.

IonQ's finances are in much better shape

Because IonQ has leading, accurate technology right now, it's attracting more partners than Rigetti, which allows it to have more resources to fund operations. Neither of these two could survive by themselves without external support, as quantum computing hasn't reached the point where it's a viable business by itself. These companies only sell a handful of early-stage research units every year, and that's not nearly enough to sustain a business.

In the second quarter, IonQ recognized revenue of $80.1 million, with some of that total coming from business it has acquired. Still, IonQ believes that it will grow its organic revenue, or revenue that's generated from new business, not acquisitions, this year by over 100%. In comparison, Rigetti's revenue totaled $5.1 million, up from $1.8 million last year. IonQ is a far larger business than Rigetti, and this scale advantage could play in its favor.

An important factor for these two is how much cash they have on hand, as it determines how long they can survive. IonQ has over $2 billion in cash and short-term investments, while Rigetti has over $500 million. That's plenty of money to fund both companies' operations for years to come, so this isn't really a differentiating factor for either stock, but it's important to note that even though both companies are unprofitable, they have the funds to run the business for some time.

In the end, I think backing the larger company makes the most sense for investors, but it's still a long shot. These two are both high-risk investments, and investors who buy either stock should anticipate taking a heavy loss on at least one of these investments. The road ahead for both of these companies is rough, but if they work out, then the payoff could be huge. I think IonQ has a far better chance of succeeding, but only time will tell which company (if any) remains.

Keithen Drury has positions in IonQ. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends IonQ. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.