Grayscale, one of the largest digital asset managers in the world, published a report on April 6 in which it supports the argument of the Google Quantum AI paper about the urgency of preparing Bitcoin and the public cryptoasset networks for the quantum threat. The document was signed by Zach Pandl, research director of the financial firm, and takes the Google study of March 30 as a starting point to draw four own conclusions about the state of risk and the path forward. The Grayscale report warns that It’s time to accelerate preparation effortsbefore the urgency becomes inevitable.
The four conclusions of Grayscale
Grayscale’s first conclusion is one of timing: Although there is no quantum computer capable of running Shor’s algorithm at scale today, progress toward that goal can occur in discrete leaps rather than advancing linearly. According to the report, the “finish line” could be closer than many assume: the Google paper estimates that between 1,200 and 1,450 logical qubits would be enough to compromise Bitcoin cryptography, which is equivalent to an advance of up to 20 times in previously estimated resources.
The second conclusion is one of technical optimism: the problem is solvable. The financial firm’s report cites Google’s own paper, which qualifies the path to post-quantum cryptography as «technically clear.» The tools exist, they have been proposed, reviewed, implemented and deployed, and they already secure internet traffic and some transactions on the blockchain. The third conclusion is that quantum risk It is not the same for all networks. According to Grayscale, it depends on whether the chain uses a UTXO (unspent outputs) or accounts model, whether its consensus is proof-of-work or proof-of-stake, whether it has native smart contracts, and how much time elapses between blocks. Under these criteria, as reported by BitcoinDynamic, Bitcoin has less technical risk than networks like Ethereum and Solana, although BTC faces challenges of its own with a third of its supply potentially exposed. The fourth conclusion points directly to governance: Bitcoin’s biggest obstacles to migrating to post-quantum crypto They are not technical but social. The community will have to coordinate a response in the absence of a central authority, something that other organizations, banks, technology companies and governments, can do simply with an order from the top.
What types of addresses are most vulnerable?
The chart included in the report, based on data from Glassnode and Grayscale as of March 5, 2026, shows the distribution of Bitcoin supply by address type. The most relevant data for the quantum debate is that two types of addresses expose public keys directly on the chain: P2PK, corresponding to the Satoshi era, and P2TR, the Taproot format introduced in 2021. According to the report, these addresses have additional quantum vulnerability compared to other formats, because a quantum computer with sufficient capacity you could use those exposed public keys to derive the private keys and access funds without needing to intercept a transaction in transit. The Google Quantum AI team revealed that this interception could occur in 9 minutes, less than what it takes to mine a block.
The problem that Bitcoin will have to solve
Finally, Grayscale identifies three options for coins stored at vulnerable addresses whose owners have lost or do not have access to private keys: burn them, do nothing, or deliberately limit the rate at which they can be spent. All three are conceptually possible, according to the report, but all require the Bitcoin community to reach an agreement. This consensus process is, historically, one of the most difficult in the ecosystem. The report mentions last year’s debate over image data stored in blocks as a recent example of the conflict that can accompany any proposed change to the protocol. Unlike a company or a government, Bitcoin does not have a chief technology officer who can simply order an update.
