IonQ is taking a distinct approach to quantum computing compared to its peers.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n
A massive market is expected to open up within the next decade for quantum computing.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n
IonQ<\/strong>(NYSE: IONQ) is one of the top competitors in the quantum computing race. It’s a pure-play option that’s solely focused on quantum computing supremacy, so if its approach fails, the stock is likely to head to zero. On the other hand, if it succeeds, there is major upside from today’s levels that could generate substantial returns for investors.<\/p>\n But can it turn a meager investment into $1 million? Let’s take a look.<\/p>\n Where to invest $1,000 right now?<\/strong> Our analyst team just revealed what they believe are the 10 best stocks <\/strong>to buy right now. Continue \u00bb<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n Image source: Getty Images.<\/p>\n IonQ uses a trapped ion approach for quantum computing<\/p>\n IonQ has emerged as a top competitor in this space primarily due to its short-term success and its partnerships. Quantum computing isn’t yet commercially relevant, and most funding comes from partnerships with various research institutions in the U.S. One of the top ones is the Air Force Research Laboratory, with which IonQ has a deep partnership.<\/p>\n Money from various contracts is what enables IonQ to operate, and the approach it is taking differentiates it from the competition.<\/p>\n IonQ employs a trapped-ion approach to perform quantum computing<\/a>, rather than a superconducting approach. The vast majority of quantum computing competitors<\/a> are taking the superconducting approach, including Rigetti Computing <\/strong>(NASDAQ: RGTI), IBM <\/strong>(NYSE: IBM), and Alphabet<\/strong>‘s Google. However, there are key advantages that the trapped-ion approach provides.<\/p>\n Perhaps the most important is the temperature at which quantum computing is conducted. Superconducting requires the particle to be cooled down to near absolute zero temperatures, which is an expensive process. For quantum computing to become relevant, it also needs to be cost-effective, and this cost may be a significant hurdle for those in this field to overcome.<\/p>\n Another advantage the trapped-ion approach has is qubit connectivity. It’s well accepted that allowing qubits to interact with each other provides more accurate calculations, but superconducting only allows qubits to interact with their neighbors. The trapped ion approach enables all the qubits within the system to interact with one another, allowing IonQ to achieve 99.9% fidelity or better.<\/p>\n IonQ’s differentiated approach is a key reason why I believe it’s a worthy investment in quantum computing, as it takes a distinct approach compared to others in this field. While this may ultimately be the wrong move, it’s impossible to tell right now, so having investments in quantum computing companies that are tackling this problem in different ways is a smart idea.<\/p>\n If IonQ’s approach prevails, could it transform an investment into $1 million?<\/p>\n IonQ could be a successful investment, but likely won’t be a millionaire-maker<\/p>\n I’ll use a $10,000 initial investment as the baseline, which would require IonQ to return 100 times its initial investment. With IonQ’s current $10.5 billion market cap, that would mean it would have to turn into a $1 trillion company. That’s a massive return, and considering that there are only 11 companies that have ever achieved a $1 trillion market capitalization, this may be a bit far-fetched.<\/p>\n As a result, I doubt that IonQ can provide 100x returns from this level. But it could still be a successful investment.<\/p>\n IonQ believes that quantum computing could have an $87 billion market opportunity by 2035. Even if it can capture only 20% of that, it would be a hugely successful investment that provides shareholders excellent returns.<\/p>\n However, investors also need to understand that an IonQ investment is far from a sure thing. It could fail and go to $0, which is why investors need to keep their position sizing fairly small — no more than 1% of their total portfolio. That way, if it succeeds, it still has a significant effect, but if it fails, then it’s not as big a deal. If you can keep that in mind, then IonQ may be a smart longshot pick for a portfolio<\/a>.<\/p>\n Should you invest $1,000 in IonQ right now?<\/p>\n Before you buy stock in IonQ, consider this:<\/p>\n The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the 10 best stocks<\/a><\/strong> for investors to buy now\u2026 and IonQ wasn\u2019t one of them. The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years.<\/p>\n Consider when Netflix<\/strong> made this list on December 17, 2004… if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you\u2019d have $652,133<\/strong>!* Or when Nvidia<\/strong> made this list on April 15, 2005… if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you\u2019d have $1,056,790<\/strong>!*<\/p>\n Now, it\u2019s worth noting Stock Advisor\u2019s total average return is 1,048% \u2014 a market-crushing outperformance compared to 180% for the S&P 500. Don\u2019t miss out on the latest top 10 list, available when you join Stock Advisor.<\/p>\n See the 10 stocks \u00bb<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n *Stock Advisor returns as of July 15, 2025<\/p>\n Suzanne Frey, an executive at Alphabet, is a member of The Motley Fool\u2019s board of directors. Keithen Drury<\/a> has positions in Alphabet. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Alphabet and International Business Machines. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy<\/a>.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"Key Points IonQ is taking a distinct approach to quantum computing compared to its peers. A massive market…\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":79311,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[22],"tags":[745,3451,30959,3448,3447,3450,3449,3452,54621,158,3455,67,132,68],"class_list":{"0":"post-79310","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-computing","8":"tag-computing","9":"tag-futures","10":"tag-ibm","11":"tag-index-market-quote","12":"tag-index-market-quotes","13":"tag-index-market-symbol","14":"tag-index-market-symbols","15":"tag-indices","16":"tag-intl-business-machines","17":"tag-technology","18":"tag-the-globe-and-mail","19":"tag-united-states","20":"tag-unitedstates","21":"tag-us"},"share_on_mastodon":{"url":"https:\/\/pubeurope.com\/@us\/114888404095522254","error":""},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/79310","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=79310"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/79310\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/79311"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=79310"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=79310"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=79310"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}![\"A](\"https:\/\/barchart-news-media-prod.aws.barchart.com\/FC\/5a16af2bfbbb3a2fdc734900797576c9\/%3Furl%3Dhttps%253a%252f%252fg.foolcdn.com%252feditorial%252fimages%252f824413%252fquantum-computing-cell.jpg%26amp%3Bw%3D700\"\/)
<\/p>\n