Bitcoin Faces a Long-Term Security Risk From Quantum Computing

Concerns about quantum computing are moving from theory into market risk, at least according to Capriole Investments founder Charles Edwards.

The quantitative fund manager argues that Bitcoin’s long-term price stability could be seriously threatened if the network fails to adopt quantum-resistant protections within the next few years.

Edwards believes the window for action is narrower than many in the crypto industry assume. While quantum computing has often been framed as a distant problem, he suggests that meaningful breakthroughs could arrive sooner, potentially exposing Bitcoin’s cryptographic foundations by the end of the decade. If that happens without a network upgrade in place, confidence in Bitcoin’s security could erode rapidly.

In Edwards’ view, markets would react long before any real-world attack occurs. The mere perception that user keys could be compromised would be enough to trigger a severe repricing. He warns that, without a solution by around 2028, Bitcoin could slide well below $50,000 and remain under pressure until the issue is resolved.

Why Bitcoin Could Be an Early Target

A core part of his argument is that Bitcoin may be more vulnerable than traditional financial institutions in this transition period. Large banks and payment networks are already experimenting with post-quantum cryptography, and many have mechanisms to reverse or halt fraudulent transactions. Bitcoin, by contrast, offers no rollback once funds move, making security assumptions far more critical.

Because of that, Edwards argues that Bitcoin could become an early target rather than a late one. He has repeatedly called for concrete progress toward a quantum-safe upgrade, suggesting that deployment would need to begin as early as 2026 to avoid a prolonged loss of market confidence.

Not everyone shares that sense of urgency. Some industry figures maintain that quantum computing capable of breaking Bitcoin’s encryption is still decades away, while others dismiss the narrative entirely. Michael Saylor, for example, has previously described quantum fears as exaggerated and driven by marketing rather than real technical timelines.

More cautious voices have taken a middle ground. Veteran Bitcoin analyst Willy Woo recently suggested practical steps for long-term holders, such as using specific wallet types, as a temporary safeguard while the broader protocol debate continues.

For now, the quantum threat remains hypothetical. But Edwards’ warning highlights a growing divide in how the industry views long-term security risks. Whether or not quantum computing arrives on his timeline, the debate itself may increasingly shape investor perception – and, ultimately, Bitcoin’s valuation.