The Quantum Race: The US Maintains the Lead, but China is Hot on Its Heels
Analysts at SCSP have presented a fresh report shedding light on the current balance of power in the quantum race between the USA and China. At present, America maintains a small but noticeable advantage in the field of quantum information science, engineering, and technology (QISET). However, the dynamics are such that this lead is rapidly shrinking, and in the coming years, we may witness a change in leadership.
The study covers five key areas: innovation, industrial potential, market ecosystem, talent pool, and government levers. The USA dominates in four of them, but China takes the lead in the fifth — thanks to a centralized strategy, strong government support, and long-term planning. As I have repeatedly noted in my analyses, it is this latter factor that becomes critical in the technological wars of the 21st century.
US Strengths: Innovation and Ecosystem
American researchers generate 35% of the most cited publications in the quantum field. For comparison, China's share is 23%, although it has doubled over the past decade. In the area of quantum error correction, the USA holds an even more significant advantage: 55% of the most cited patents belong to American authors versus 18% for Chinese ones.
The software ecosystem is another trump card for the States. Tools like Qiskit (IBM) and Cirq (Google) have become de facto standards for developers worldwide. By December 2025, the number of Qiskit downloads exceeded 450,000. For comparison, its Chinese counterpart PyQPanda has been downloaded only 4,000 times. This gap speaks volumes about who sets the tone in quantum software development.
Private investment in the US quantum sector reached $5.3 billion by 2024. American companies have deployed between 39 and 73 quantum computers — compared to 15–18 in China. However, the latter figure may be understated due to the lower transparency of the Chinese market.
Where China is Catching Up and Overtaking
China shows the most impressive progress in materials science, algorithms, and quantum networks. In the segment of advanced quantum materials, Chinese scientists account for about 50% of the most significant publications — compared to 20% for American ones. This is a direct result of coordinated work among universities, state laboratories, and national structures.
In quantum algorithms, China has already overtaken the USA in patents by a ratio of 5:2. Although publications are still more often associated with American authors, their share has dropped from 40% to 30% over the past five years, while the Chinese share has grown to 20%.
China's biggest advantage is in quantum networks. The country has deployed a quantum key distribution (QKD) system spanning 6,277 miles over fiber optics, as well as a direct quantum communication network of 186 miles. In the USA, comparable projects are still regional in nature: 124 miles in the Chicago Quantum Network, 98 miles at Brookhaven National Laboratory, and about 13 miles between Illinois and Indiana. As an analyst, I see a strategic miscalculation here by the USA: they did not make QKD a priority, focusing instead on other areas.
Manufacturing and Talent: The Achilles' Heel of the USA
The cost of building clean rooms for quantum equipment in the USA is $800–1,000 per square foot. In China, it is about $150, with regional authorities subsidizing up to 30% of costs. This creates a serious imbalance in scaling production.
The talent issue is also concerning. In the USA, 61 educational institutions offer quantum programs, and the system remains open to foreign researchers. However, China graduates 50% more PhDs in STEM disciplines annually, and since 2000, this figure has grown three times faster than the American one. Scale matters.
Funding and Strategy
Government funding for quantum technologies in China is estimated at $15 billion by the end of 2024. The USA has invested about $6 billion over the past seven years. The American model is decentralized: universities, startups, and giants like Google and IBM develop different approaches. The Chinese model is centralized, with clear state laboratories and long-term plans.
As I believe, the outcome of the race will be determined not so much by the volume of investment as by the ability to translate scientific breakthroughs into scalable, working systems. The USA is still ahead, but if China maintains its current pace, we could see a change in leadership by the end of the decade. The market should prepare for a new reality.