Project Case Studies

Deep-dive analyses of major cryptocurrencies and their quantum resistance posture. Cryptographic architectures, governance challenges, migration pathways, and realistic timelines.

What These Case Studies Cover

Each case study examines a cryptocurrency’s complete quantum vulnerability profile: current cryptographic primitives, key exposure levels, governance constraints affecting upgrade timelines, proposed or active migration strategies, and realistic assessments of whether the project can achieve quantum resistance before Q-Day. Scores use the QRC V5.1 methodology where higher scores indicate stronger quantum resistance.

Understanding QRC Scores

QRC scores measure quantum resistance—a cryptocurrency’s ability to withstand attacks from cryptographically relevant quantum computers. Scores range from 0 to 100:

🟢 GREEN: 71–100

Quantum-Ready. Strong protection deployed or comprehensive mitigations in place. Continue monitoring for new developments.

🟡 YELLOW: 31–70

Upgrade Recommended. Partial vulnerabilities exist. Active migration planning or demonstrated crypto-agility provides path forward.

🔴 RED: 0–30

Action Needed. Critical vulnerability with high key exposure and limited migration progress. Requires immediate attention.

Featured Case Studies

Bitcoin (BTC)

Yellow
41.8

The $1 trillion question. ECDSA signatures, 35% key exposure, no official migration plan, and governance challenges that could take years to resolve.

Key Exposure: 35.0%% • Crypto-Agility: 4.3
Read Case Study →

Ethereum (ETH)

Red
16.2

Dual vulnerability: ECDSA for transactions and BLS for consensus. Highest key exposure but strongest governance agility and active EIP proposals.

Key Exposure: 88.0%% • Crypto-Agility: 5.7
Read Case Study →

Cardano (ADA)

Red
28.1

The first mover. Active PQC testnet with SPHINCS+ signatures, concrete migration timeline, and formal governance structure. Leading by example.

Key Exposure: 70.0%% • Crypto-Agility: 5.0
Read Case Study →

Solana (SOL)

Yellow
31.5

Performance vs. security dilemma. Ed25519 throughout, optimized for speed. PQC signatures would dramatically reduce throughput—an identity crisis awaits.

Key Exposure: 85.0%% • Crypto-Agility: 4.0
Read Case Study →

Polkadot (DOT)

Yellow
32.3

Multi-chain coordination challenge. Relay chain plus 50+ parachains require aligned migration. Substrate framework provides upgrade flexibility.

Key Exposure: 72.0%% • Crypto-Agility: 7.7
Read Case Study →

Monero (XMR)

Yellow
41.8

Architectural crisis. Ring signatures, stealth addresses, and RingCT all depend on elliptic curves. No production-ready PQC alternatives exist for privacy features.

Key Exposure: 30.0%% • Crypto-Agility: 2.3
Read Case Study →

How to Use These Case Studies

Each case study is structured to help different audiences extract actionable insights:

For Investors

Focus on the Investor Verdict section and score breakdown. Compare governance timelines against Q-Day estimates. Assess whether migration can complete before quantum computers arrive.

For Developers

Examine the Cryptographic Architecture and Migration Strategies sections. Understand which primitives need replacement and what PQC alternatives are being considered.

For Researchers

Review the Timeline Analysis with optimistic, realistic, and pessimistic scenarios. Cross-reference with our scoring methodology for detailed component weightings.

For Project Teams

Use the What Could Go Right/Wrong sections to identify risks and opportunities. Compare your project’s approach to peers and learn from others’ migration strategies.

V5.1 Scoring Components

Each case study includes a detailed score breakdown across seven weighted dimensions:

Component Weight What It Measures
Signature Resistance 35% Quantum resistance of transaction signing algorithms
Consensus Security 15% Whether the network survives if signatures break
Key Protection 15% Percentage of value behind unexposed public keys
Crypto-Agility 12% Ability to upgrade cryptographic primitives
Hash Strength 8% Post-Grover security margin of hash functions
Pairing-Free Status 8% Avoidance of BLS signatures and KZG commitments
Operational Mitigations 7% Active measures reducing quantum exposure

For wrapped tokens and cross-chain assets, the Dependency Multiplier adjusts the final score based on inherited vulnerabilities from underlying chains.

Explore the Full Rankings

See how all 49 tracked cryptocurrencies score for quantum resistance, or dive into the methodology behind our assessments.

Last updated: December 4, 2025 | Scoring Engine V5.1