Concerns that quantum computing could one day break Bitcoin’s cryptography have resurfaced. Yet, a new report by CoinShares argues that the quantum risks remain distant, with only a fraction of Bitcoin’s supply potentially vulnerable.

The report frames quantum computing as a long-term engineering challenge. It argues that Bitcoin has ample time to adapt well before quantum machines reach a cryptographically relevant scale.

Sponsored

The Quantum Threat Assessment For Bitcoin

In the report titled “Quantum Vulnerability in Bitcoin: A Manageable Risk,” CoinShares’ Bitcoin Research Lead Christopher Bendiksen explained that Bitcoin relies on elliptic-curve cryptography to secure transactions. 

In theory, a sufficiently powerful quantum computer could use Shor’s algorithm to derive private keys from public keys. This could enable unauthorized spending.

However, Bendiksen noted that such an attack would require quantum machines with millions of stable, error-corrected qubits. This is far beyond today’s capabilities.

“Breaking secp256k1 within a practical amount of time (<1 year) needs 10-100,000 times the current number of logical qubits; relevant quantum tech at least 10 years off. Long-term attacks can take place over years—could become feasible within a decade; short-term (mempool attacks) need <10-min computations—infeasible in anything but the very long term (decades),” the report read.

The report also examined the scope of Bitcoin’s real exposure. According to Bendiksen, only about 1.6 million BTC, roughly 8% of the total supply, resides in legacy Pay-to-Public-Key (P2PK) addresses where public keys are already exposed. However, the true practical risk is significantly smaller.

Of that amount, the report estimated that only around 10,200 BTC could plausibly be targeted in a way that would have an impact. This represents less than 0.1% of Bitcoin’s total supply.

Sponsored

“The remaining ~1.6 million all sit in 32,607 individual, ~50 btc UTXOs, that would take millennia to unlock even in the most outlandishly optimistic scenarios of technological progression in quantum computing,” Bendiksen stated.

The remaining vulnerable coins are dispersed across tens of thousands of addresses. This distribution would make large-scale exploitation slow and operationally impractical even for advanced quantum systems, according to the analysis.

This limited exposure exists because of modern address types. Pay-to-Public-Key-Hash (P2PKH) and Pay-to-Script-Hash (P2SH) do not reveal public keys until coins are spent, sharply reducing the attack surface.

While post-quantum cryptographic proposals exist, Bendiksen cautioned against premature or forced changes. He warned they could introduce new risks, weaken decentralization, or rely on cryptographic schemes that have not yet been sufficiently tested in adversarial environments.

Sponsored

“For the perceivable future, market implications appear limited,” Bendiksen added. “The greater concern is preserving Bitcoin’s immutability and neutrality, which could be jeopardised by premature protocol changes.”

Meanwhile, this outlook aligns with views previously expressed by other industry figures, including Casa co-founder Jameson Lopp and Cardano founder Charles Hoskinson. Both of whom have argued that quantum computing poses no near-term threat to Bitcoin’s cryptography.

Quantum Risk No Longer Ignored as Investors and Developers Prepare

That said, not all market participants share this view. Some institutional investors are increasingly factoring quantum computing risk into their Bitcoin exposure rather than dismissing it as a distant concern. 

BeInCrypto reported that strategist Christopher Wood reduced a 10% Bitcoin allocation from Jefferies’ model portfolio, reallocating capital toward gold and mining equities. This move came amid concerns that future advances in quantum computing could threaten Bitcoin’s security.

Sponsored

At the same time, several blockchain projects are already taking proactive steps. Coinbase, Ethereum, and Optimism have publicly outlined efforts to prepare for a post-quantum future.

Charles Edwards of Capriole Investments has also suggested that Bitcoin’s price may need to decline further before the network attracts sufficient attention to the issue of quantum security. He framed market pressure as a potential catalyst for broader technical discussion.

“$50K not that far away now. I was serious when I said last year that price would need to go lower to incentivize proper attention to Bitcoin quantum security. This is the first promising progress we have seen to date,” he said.

Edwards added that substantial work still lies ahead, warning that Bitcoin’s quantum preparedness efforts would need to accelerate in 2026.