Fears that quantum computing could soon undermine Bitcoin’s cryptography have resurfaced, but a new analysis from CoinShares suggests those concerns remain largely theoretical for now. According to the report, the technical capabilities required to threaten Bitcoin are still many years away, giving the network sufficient time to adapt.
CoinShares positions quantum computing not as an immediate danger, but as a long-term engineering problem that will unfold gradually rather than suddenly disrupting Bitcoin’s security model.
How quantum attacks on Bitcoin would work in theory
In its report, “Quantum Vulnerability in Bitcoin: A Manageable Risk,” CoinShares Bitcoin Research Lead Christopher Bendiksen explains that Bitcoin relies on elliptic-curve cryptography to secure transactions. In theory, a powerful enough quantum computer could apply Shor’s algorithm to derive private keys from public keys, enabling unauthorized spending.
In practice, however, Bendiksen argues that such an attack would require quantum machines with millions of stable, error-corrected qubits. Current quantum systems fall far short of this threshold.
The report estimates that breaking Bitcoin’s secp256k1 cryptography within a practical timeframe would require between 10 and 100,000 times more logical qubits than exist today. While long-term attacks spanning years could become theoretically feasible within a decade, short-term attacks such as real-time mempool exploitation remain unrealistic for decades.
Advertisement
How much Bitcoin is actually exposed
Beyond raw computing power, the report also examines Bitcoin’s real-world exposure. Bendiksen notes that roughly 1.6 million BTC, around 8 percent of total supply, sits in legacy Pay-to-Public-Key addresses where public keys are already visible on-chain.
Even so, CoinShares estimates that only around 10,200 BTC could realistically be targeted in a way that would matter. This represents less than 0.1 percent of Bitcoin’s total supply.
The remaining potentially vulnerable coins are spread across tens of thousands of addresses, making any coordinated, large-scale attack operationally slow and impractical, even for advanced quantum systems.
Modern address types such as Pay-to-Public-Key-Hash and Pay-to-Script-Hash further reduce risk by keeping public keys hidden until funds are spent, significantly shrinking the available attack surface.
Why premature protocol changes may be risky
While post-quantum cryptographic alternatives exist, Bendiksen warns against rushing changes into Bitcoin’s protocol. According to the report, forced or premature upgrades could introduce new vulnerabilities, weaken decentralization, or rely on cryptographic schemes that have not yet been battle-tested in hostile environments.
For the foreseeable future, Bendiksen argues that market implications remain limited. He suggests that the greater risk lies in compromising Bitcoin’s immutability and neutrality through unnecessary protocol changes driven by fear rather than technical necessity.
This perspective aligns with views previously shared by industry figures such as Jameson Lopp and Charles Hoskinson, both of whom have stated that quantum computing does not pose a near-term threat to Bitcoin.
Investors and developers begin to prepare anyway
Despite the long timelines outlined by CoinShares, quantum risk is no longer being ignored entirely. Some institutional investors are beginning to factor future quantum developments into their Bitcoin exposure.
Recent reports indicate that strategist Christopher Wood reduced Bitcoin allocation in a model portfolio, reallocating capital toward gold and mining equities, partly due to concerns around long-term cryptographic risk.
At the same time, several blockchain ecosystems are already preparing. Coinbase, Ethereum, and Optimism have publicly discussed early-stage work toward post-quantum resilience.
Market participants such as Charles Edwards of Capriole Investments argue that price pressure may be what ultimately forces broader engagement with quantum security. According to Edwards, meaningful progress may accelerate only once Bitcoin’s market valuation drops low enough to refocus developer and investor attention on structural risks.
He has suggested that quantum preparedness could become a more active topic in 2026, noting that while early signals are emerging, substantial technical work still lies ahead.
DISCLAIMER: Information provided on our site IS FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY!
