"Quantum advantage," weekly
Breakthroughs are announced on a cadence that outpaces peer review. Most arrive with a headline speedup and no stated problem size, benchmark, or classical baseline to compare against.
Veriqa for Investors & Corp-Dev
Diligence quantum like you diligence everything else: on the evidence.
Quantum companies and claims land on your desk faster than the field matures. Veriqa is a neutral evidence layer that turns a thesis, deck, paper, or press claim into a graded, source-linked diligence brief — so you can decide before the market settles, without a quantum PhD on staff.
01 · The gap
The investor's problem.
Capital has to move on quantum before the science is settled. The vocabulary is technical, the claims are loud, and the people who can check them are scarce and expensive.
No in-house bench
Few funds, family offices, or corp-dev teams keep a quantum physicist or post-quantum cryptographer on staff. The questions that separate signal from story go unasked.
Outside advisors are slow & costly
Booking an academic for a one-off read takes weeks, costs accordingly, and rarely produces a record you can drop into an IC memo or a board deck.
Reputational & capital risk
Backing an unsupported claim — or passing on a real one — carries both capital downside and credibility cost with your LPs, your board, and the market.
02 · The deliverable
What you get: a diligence brief, not an opinion.
Veriqa reads the inputs you provide and returns a structured, source-linked brief. It is decision-support: it organizes and grades the evidence so you and your advisors can decide.
- Claim extraction & evidence table. Every material claim pulled out and laid against its supporting evidence, each row carrying a source ID and a confidence level.
- Hype / overclaim-risk score. An illustrative indicator of how far the narrative runs ahead of the cited evidence — e.g. advantage asserted with no classical baseline.
- Missing-evidence list. The specific benchmarks, baselines, problem sizes, and disclosures that would be required to substantiate the headline claims.
- Proceed / monitor / require-further-diligence memo. A board-ready readiness verdict with the reasoning and the open questions stated plainly.
Decision-support and general information only — not investment, financial, legal, or tax advice, not a recommendation to buy, sell, or hold any security, and not an offer or solicitation of any security.
Drafts route through a reviewer workflow gate. A Veriqa brief is held in draft until an internal reviewer approves it — the software enforces the gate, the brief cannot be released around it. Independent expert review is recommended for material decisions; we do not represent that a staffed panel of named experts signs off on every brief.
03 · What it looks like
Three readiness verdicts, illustrated. Illustrative
Every brief resolves to one of three states — proceed, monitor, or require further diligence. A verdict grades how well the claims are supported by the cited evidence, not whether to own anything: "require further diligence" means a claim is unsubstantiated as written, not that the company lacks merit. The subjects below are fictional and the scores are fabricated for demonstration; they are not ratings of any real company, security, or technology.
Illustrative decision logic only. Verdicts are decision-support — "proceed", "monitor", and "require further diligence" describe how well a claim is evidenced, not a recommendation to buy, sell, or hold any security. Not investment, financial, legal, or tax advice.
QubitNova (fictional) Require further diligence
An illustrative quantum-sensing startup claiming an "exponential speedup" with no named benchmark, problem size, or classical baseline. Maturity: low. Overclaim risk: high. Verdict as written: require further diligence — the headline is unsubstantiated until a baseline is shown.
Helix Compute (fictional) Monitor
An illustrative simulation startup with a real benchmark and a classical baseline, but an advantage that holds only at a problem size below its stated target. Maturity: emerging. Overclaim risk: moderate. Verdict: monitor, and re-run the brief as the next milestone lands.
An illustrative PQC migration Proceed
A portfolio company's post-quantum cryptography migration mapped to published NIST/FIPS standards, with a phased plan and evidence cited. Maturity: established. Overclaim risk: low. Verdict: proceed, with the milestones tracked.
Illustrative figures and verdicts only; fictional subjects. Decision-support and general information only — not investment, financial, legal, or tax advice, not a recommendation to buy, sell, or hold any security, and not an offer or solicitation of any security.
04 · Where it fits
Where investors use Veriqa.
Four recurring decisions where a neutral evidence layer shortens the loop and leaves an auditable record.
Startup technical diligence
Hand Veriqa the deck, the founder's paper, and the data room's technical claims. Get back what is benchmarked, what is asserted, and what would have to be true — before you write the IC memo or set valuation expectations.
Public-company narrative review
Assess the quantum and post-quantum claims a public company makes in its filings, decks, and press, against publicly available evidence. The output is decision-support and context for your own analysis — it is not a securities recommendation.
M&A / corp-dev target assessment
For acquirers and corporate development teams, separate a target's defensible technical position from its marketing. Surface the missing-evidence list early, before it becomes a post-close surprise.
Portfolio monitoring & recurring intelligence
Re-run briefs on a cadence as companies publish, ship, or restate claims. Track whether the evidence is catching up to the narrative across a portfolio, with a versioned record of how the verdict changed.
05 · Why neutral
Why a neutral evidence layer.
Veriqa builds no quantum hardware and runs no chemistry. That is deliberate, and it is the point — the layer that grades the claims has nothing of its own to sell you on.
— No conflict
Nothing to defend
No qubits, no roadmap, no benchmark of our own to flatter. Veriqa has no technology stake in any verdict, so the grading is not quietly steering you toward a product.
— Discipline
Claim-discipline as insurance
The same rule applies to every brief: advantage is not credited without a named benchmark, a problem size, and a classical baseline. That discipline is what makes a verdict worth showing to an IC or a board.
— Defensible
An auditable record
Every brief is source-linked and versioned, with the reviewer gate logged. If a decision is questioned later, you can show exactly what was known, cited, and reviewed at the time.
06 · The engagement
How an engagement runs.
From the decision you're facing to a board-ready memo, with the reviewer gate enforced in between. See pricing for scope tiers and turnaround.
- 1
Scope
You tell us the decision: a company, an asset, a claim, or a thesis to pressure-test.
- 2
Ingest sources
Decks, papers, patents, filings, URLs, and your own notes go in — under NDA.
- 3
Grade evidence
Claims extracted, baselines checked, sources scored, missing evidence flagged.
- 4
Reviewer gate
Draft held until an internal reviewer approves; the software enforces the gate.
- 5
Board-ready memo
Verdict, evidence table, risk scores, and open questions — delivered in your format.
07 · Questions
Frequently asked.
Do you give investment advice?
No. Veriqa is decision-support: we organize and grade the evidence so you and your advisors can decide. We do not recommend buying, selling, or holding any security, we do not promise returns, and nothing we produce is an offer or solicitation.
Can you assess a public company?
We assess the publicly available claims and evidence a company puts forward — in filings, decks, and press — as decision-support and context for your own analysis. That is not a securities recommendation, a valuation opinion, or a view on the stock.
Who reviews the report?
Every brief passes through an internal reviewer workflow gate before release; the software holds it in draft until that reviewer approves. For material decisions we recommend independent expert review in addition — we do not claim a staffed panel signs off on every brief.
How fast can I get one?
Turnaround depends on scope and source volume; recurring portfolio briefs run faster than a cold first read. See pricing for current tiers and timing.
What do you need from me?
The decision you're facing and the materials you have — a deck, a paper, a data-room export, a list of claims, or just the company name. The more sources you can share, the tighter the missing-evidence list.
Is my deal data confidential?
Yes. Materials are handled under NDA and used only to produce your brief. See our Privacy Policy for how data is stored and retained.
Bring us the decision you're facing.
Tell us the company, the claim, or the thesis. We'll turn it into a graded, source-linked brief your IC or board can stand behind.
Decision-support and general information only — not investment, financial, legal, or tax advice, not a recommendation to buy, sell, or hold any security, and not an offer or solicitation of any security.