IonQ builds general-purpose quantum computers using trapped-ion technology — individual charged atoms suspended in electromagnetic fields and manipulated with lasers to act as qubits, an approach prized for high gate fidelity (IonQ cites ~99.99% two-qubit accuracy) and long coherence versus the superconducting chips IBM and Google favour. Customers rent time on its machines through the big cloud marketplaces (AWS Braket, Microsoft Azure Quantum, Google Cloud) and IonQ's own cloud, and it is extending into quantum networking and sensing via a fast run of acquisitions (Oxford Ionics, ID Quantique, Capella). What sets it apart is being one of the very few pure-play, publicly-traded quantum names with a working commercial cloud offering and a fortress balance sheet (~$3.1B cash & investments). The catch for a reader: revenue is still tiny (~$187M trailing) against an ~$18B market value, the company loses heavily at the operating line, and useful fault-tolerant quantum computing is widely expected only around 2028–2032 — so this is a long-dated, high-risk technology bet, not a cash-generating business.
Lifecycle: Early-revenue / speculative (deeply pre-profit). IonQ is scored on the pre-profit Technology lens — revenue trajectory, cash runway, gross margin, dilution and moat — not on P/E, ROE or net margin, all of which are distorted by a +$1.1B non-cash warrant gain (see Gate 4). Reported TTM net margin (+148%) and P/E (545x) are accounting noise; the operating line is the truth: an operating loss of -$271.5M in Q1'26 against $64.7M of revenue — the business spends roughly four dollars for every dollar it books.
| Sub-signal | Reading | Score |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue trajectory | Q1'26 $64.7M, +755% YoY; FY26 guide raised to $260–270M; RPO $470M (+554%). Exceptional — but a large share is inorganic (Oxford Ionics / ID Quantique / Capella) and lumpy government contracts on a tiny base. | 78 |
| Profitability (operating) | Operating margin ≈ -420%; guided adj-EBITDA loss $(330)–(310)M for FY26; consensus shows net losses continuing through 2030 (2030 net income est. ≈ -$414M). No profitability in the modelled horizon. | 10 |
| Cash generation | FCF persistently negative (FCF/share ≈ -$1.18 TTM). Offset by ~$3.1B cash & investments — ~9-yr runway, so no near-term dilution pressure, but no self-funding either. | 28 |
| Balance-sheet health | Effectively debt-free (D/E 0.006), current ratio 14x, cash/share $5.67. The single strongest pillar of the whole name. | 90 |
| Dilution / SBC | Shares +65% YoY; SBC $128.5M/quarter ≈ 200% of revenue. Shareholders are being diluted aggressively to fund R&D and M&A. | 14 |
50 — cloud access is metered against IBM/Google/AWS-hosted alternatives; no demonstrated pricing power at this stage.
45 — some developer-ecosystem pull via the cloud marketplaces, but multi-vendor back-ends (Azure Quantum hosts IonQ, Quantinuum and Rigetti) blunt lock-in.
40 — algorithms are largely portable across back-ends; customers can and do multi-home. Derived directly from the Competitive Environment read below.
45 — trapped-ion fidelity edge is real, but Quantinuum (also trapped-ion) is a credible cost/quality peer; superconducting rivals scale qubit counts faster.
68 — genuine IP moat: fidelity leadership plus Oxford Ionics' semiconductor-manufacturable ion-trap patents. The strongest moat dimension.
Moat average ≈ 50/100 — an IP-and-fidelity lead that is real but contested, with weak lock-in.
ROIC & capital allocation: ROIC is deeply negative and not meaningful pre-profit. Capital allocation is the debate: management has deployed ~$2.5B of (mostly stock) into 18 months of M&A to assemble a full-stack quantum platform — visionary if quantum commercialises on their timeline, value-destructive dilution if it does not. FMP financial-health rating B (overall 3/5) with DCF and P/E sub-scores at the floor (1/5) — consistent with 'solid balance sheet, no earnings support'. Net Quality 44: a technology and balance-sheet story wrapped around an unproven, cash-consuming business.
Warranted-multiple anchor: N/A — IonQ is pre-profit with no reliable earnings multiple, so the P/E-based warranted anchor cannot be computed (recorded as warranted_multiple: "na"). Valuation is therefore scored on EV/Revenue against the sector guardrail floor, which is exactly the case the floor exists for. Because the reported P/E (545x) and net margin are inflated by the +$1.1B non-cash warrant gain, no earnings-based lens is used at all.
| Lens | Reading | Verdict |
|---|---|---|
| EV/Revenue vs guardrail (THE anchor here) | EV ≈ $15–18B (mkt cap $18.3B less ~$3.1B net cash; FMP TTM EV $17.9B). ÷ FY26 guided rev $265M = ≈ 57–68x forward; ÷ trailing $187M = ≈ 81–96x. IT guardrail 'rich' line is EV/Rev ≥ 20x. | Expensive — 3–5x the line |
| Price/Sales (TTM) | 98x (FMP). | Extreme |
| Own-history decile | Off a Jan-2021 SPAC listing the multiple has spent its whole life in nosebleed territory; even by its own range this is upper-decile. | Extreme (0–9) |
| PEG-style (growth-adjusted) | Growth is high, but on a tiny base and with no path to earnings — a growth-adjusted read cannot rescue a 57x+ forward revenue multiple with negative and widening losses. | Poor |
| Analyst target & consensus (subordinate) | Consensus $67.13 / median $67.5 / high $85 / low $48.5 (6 analysts). Price $49.12 is ~27% below consensus — the one bullish valuation signal — and grades split 3 Buy / 3 Hold ('Buy', 50% bullish). | Mild positive |
| FCF yield | Negative (FCF/share ≈ -$1.18). N/A as a value anchor. | N/A |
How the sub-signals net. Per the framework, the relative cross-checks (including the ~27%-below-consensus analyst signal) can only order the name within the band the anchor/guardrail sets — they cannot lift an Expensive name into Fair. The guardrail floor is dispositive: at 57–95x EV/Rev the name is squarely in the Expensive band (val_band = expensive), which routes the Decision Matrix to its Expensive column (→ HOLD) and arms Gate 3. Score 20/100.
IonQ's fortunes sit almost entirely above its own execution, on the pace of quantum-computing commercialisation and the government/defence and quantum-networking spend that funds the industry pre-revenue. This is not a commodity-price driver; it is a technology-adoption-and-funding driver, so it is read on trajectory and funding flow rather than a spot price.
| Horizon | Driver state | Score |
|---|---|---|
| Short (0–4 wk) | Quantum-stock sentiment has cooled — IONQ is ~40% off its late-May high and the daily tape is in a downtrend. Momentum has rotated out short-term. | 48 |
| Medium (1–6 mo) | Raised FY26 guidance, $470M RPO and a steady contract/announcement cadence (networking, defence, cloud) keep the narrative alive; offset by no commercialisation inflection and rich-multiple fragility. | 60 |
| Long (6–18 mo+) | Large secular TAM and sustained government funding; the 2028–2032 fault-tolerance window is the prize. Strong but distant and unproven — and shared with deep-pocketed rivals. | 72 |
Amplification note: the blended driver score of 62 is a moderate tailwind (≥65 would be a strong tailwind). Critically, amplification only intensifies a BUY or SELL base signal — it never amplifies a HOLD. Since valuation routes every horizon to a HOLD base (and Gates 3/4 cap at HOLD regardless), the driver tailwind is documented but does not lift the signal. It is the reason the name is a Watch rather than an Avoid.
Macro regime is Contested (Soft Landing / Stagflation co-lead 30/30, Reaccel 27, Defensive Bust 13; confidence Low-Med). Risk appetite is currently risk-on (VIX 16.59), UST10Y 4.48%, unemployment 4.2%, June NFP +57k. IonQ sits in Technology / XLK, which the macro map scores Outperform across Short/Medium/Long — a mild tailwind, so the stance is Trend-Following (aligned with the sector wind) rather than Contrarian. Conviction is deliberately tempered to 55 (from a higher raw sector read) for two reasons: (1) the valuation is extreme, which makes any single high-beta name far more fragile than the sector aggregate; and (2) the regime is Contested with an armed — though not-triggering, and currently falsifying as breadth broadens — 'S&P 500 concentration / AI-unwind' tail. IonQ is a loss-making mid-cap spec, NOT an index-top-weight name on non-operating-inflated earnings, so it is explicitly NOT in that tail's cohort — the systemic tail is not forced onto this name (though a general risk-off would hit it hard idiosyncratically; see §11 Bear).
Source: sector-map · Macro report 2026-07-03
Timing blends the multi-timeframe trend (30%), the risk-reward setup (20%), and — at the low macro-sensitivity weighting appropriate for a niche technology name (macro 10% / sentiment 20% / catalyst 20%) — the macro overlay, sentiment and catalyst layers.
| Component | Reading | Score |
|---|---|---|
| MTF trend (30%) | Confluence bearish: monthly/weekly uptrend but daily broke support, hourly/15-min strong downtrend; sitting on the 200-DMA (~$49.6). See §9. | 42 |
| Risk-reward setup (20%) | Nearest logical stop is the $39.8 support (~$9, ~1.8 ATR of $5.05 away) while overhead supply sits at $54–55 (50-DMA / broken support) — an unfavourable ~1:0.6 setup from here. Better entry is lower ($40) or on a confirmed $55 reclaim. | 38 |
| Relative strength | ~40% below the late-May $72 high; underperforming its own recent trend and rolling over vs a risk-on XLK. Mid-range of the 52-wk band ($25.89–$84.64). | 40 |
| Macro overlay (10%) | VIX 16.6 risk-on and a Tech/XLK tailwind are supportive, but a long-duration name is exposed to the CPI→FOMC rate path in late July. | 55 |
| Sentiment (20%) | News tone mixed-to-cautious ('down 40% from ATH', 'high-risk'); analyst grade actions are stale (2023–24), so recency-weighted near zero. Retail enthusiasm has cooled. | 42 |
| Catalyst (20%) | Clustered CPI + FOMC + Q2 earnings in late-Jul/early-Aug — path risk is elevated, which argues for smaller size / waiting, not chasing. | 40 |
Timing = 40. The higher-timeframe uptrend keeps this from being an outright SELL tape, but the daily breakdown, the unfavourable risk-reward from $49 into $55 resistance, and the clustered event risk all say this is not an entry point. For a holder it is a 'manage the stop' tape; for a new buyer it is a 'wait for $40 or a $55 reclaim' tape.
| Date | Event | Impact | Forecast | Previous | Relevant? | Why |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ~2026-07-15 | US CPI (Jun) | High | ~2.9% YoY | 2.9% | Medium | Growth-stock valuations are rate-sensitive; a hot print lifts the 10Y and pressures long-duration names like IONQ. |
| ~2026-07-29/30 | FOMC rate decision | High | Hold | Hold | Medium | Rate path drives the discount rate on far-future cash flows — the whole IONQ thesis is long-duration. |
| ~2026-08-06 | IonQ Q2 2026 earnings | High | Rev $65–68M (guide) | $64.7M | Yes | The key idiosyncratic catalyst — guidance, RPO trajectory and burn are what move a pre-profit spec name. |
| Date | Event | Actual | Forecast | Surprise | Impact |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-07-02 | Nonfarm Payrolls (Jun) | +57k | ~+80k | Miss | Mild risk-off; softens the labour picture but not decisive for a non-cyclical spec. |
| 2026-05-07 | IonQ Q1 2026 results | Rev $64.7M / guide raised | $49.7M cons | Large beat | Drove the May run to ~$72 before the June fade. |
No high-impact macro event inside the 14-day window. The clustered CPI → FOMC → Q2-earnings sequence in late-Jul/early-Aug is why the next re-check is set at the 2-week cap and why timing confidence is held modest.
| Timeframe | Trend | Direction | RSI | MACD | Key S/R | Breakout | Vol |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Monthly | Uptrend ↑ | Bullish | 55.8 | +, flat | S: $21.6 R: $84.6 | Resist. breakout | 0.1x |
| Weekly | Uptrend ↑ | Neutral | 50.7 | +, rising | S: $25.9 R: $54.2 | None | 0.5x |
| Daily | Downtrend ↓ | Bearish | 41.0 | -, falling | S: $39.8 R: $54.8 | Support breakdown | 0.6x |
| Hourly | Strong down ↓ | Bearish | 39.7 | -, falling | S: $48.2 R: $54.8 | Support breakdown | 0.0x |
| 15-min | Strong down ↓ | Neutral | 49.1 | flattening | S: $48.2 R: $54.4 | None | 0.0x |
| Confluence: Bearish (higher-TF uptrend, lower-TF rolling over) · MTF Score 42 | |||||||
A textbook higher-timeframe-bullish / lower-timeframe-breakdown split. Monthly and weekly remain in secular uptrends (the stock is up multiples over two years), but the daily has broken support with a falling MACD and sits right on its 200-DMA (~$49.6), the hourly and 15-min are in strong downtrends, and the name is ~40% below its late-May $72 high. Net confluence is bearish — rallies into the $54–55 (50-DMA / broken-support) zone are where supply is, and the $39.8 daily support is the line that matters on the downside. This is a 'sell-the-rip in a short-term downtrend' tape, not a dip-buy setup — consistent with the Timing pillar at 40.
IONQ daily closes, Jan–Jul 2026 (sampled). The Feb sell-off to ~$26, the Apr–May run to ~$72, and the June fade back to $49 — now on the 200-DMA with the daily broken to the downside. 52-wk range $25.89–$84.64; beta 3.18.
A hard re-rating catalyst lands: a marquee government/defence or quantum-networking contract, or a roadmap milestone (progress toward the 2027 >10,000-physical-qubit target) that the market reads as pulling fault-tolerance forward relative to superconducting rivals. Risk-on persists (VIX low, XLK bid), the $470M RPO keeps compounding, and the multiple re-expands toward the prior $84 high. High-beta (3.2) means a thesis-confirming quarter can move it 50%+ quickly. This is an option paying off, not a change in the valuation math.
IonQ delivers into its raised FY26 guide ($260–270M) and keeps announcing contracts, but shows no commercialisation inflection and no path to profit — losses widen as guided. The extreme EV/Rev multiple neither fully corrects (the balance sheet and growth narrative support it) nor expands (nothing forces a re-rate). The stock chops in a wide $42–58 band around the 200-DMA, roughly flat to today over 12 months. HOLD is the honest base case: real driver, real backlog, priced for perfection.
The severe idiosyncratic de-rating the framework demands for a spec name on an extreme multiple. Any of: a guidance cut or RPO stall, a broad growth-stock/risk-off rotation (the Contested regime's downside), a competitor (Quantinuum, IBM, Google, PsiQuantum) claiming a logical-qubit advantage first, or continued relentless dilution souring sentiment. At 57–95x EV/Rev there is no earnings floor to catch it — mean-reversion is a 50%+ move, back toward the $25.89 52-wk low. This is the scenario that flips DNB arm-(a) live and would take the name to DO-NOT-BUY. Note: this is company/cohort-idiosyncratic risk, NOT the macro 'AI-concentration unwind' tail (IONQ is not in that cohort).
Forecast: No entry group is met (0/3) → Conviction Ladder = WAIT. For a fundamentally-driven entry the name would need to de-rate toward ~$40 (into the Expensive→Full boundary) — not visible on a 4–6-week horizon absent a broad risk-off. For a purely technical/tactical trade, the trigger is either a high-volume daily reclaim of $55 (could come within 2–4 weeks on a positive catalyst) or a tested higher-low bounce off $40. Until one prints, this is a Watch, not a Buy.
Forecast: No exit condition is live (holder view). Price is ~24% above the $39 stop; on a 3.2-beta name that buffer can evaporate in days, so the stop is a real risk, not a remote one. Thesis-invalidation legs are slow-moving (competitive/roadmap) and would be flagged well before they resolve.
{
"ticker": "IONQ",
"exchange": "NYSE",
"exchange_ticker": "NYSE:IONQ",
"isin": "US46222L1089",
"api_ticker": "IONQ",
"company": "IonQ, Inc.",
"sector": "Technology",
"sub_industry": "Quantum computing (trapped-ion) hardware + cloud + networking",
"lifecycle_stage": "early-revenue / speculative (deeply pre-profit)",
"analysis_status": "donatien-pick",
"user_horizon": null,
"user_allocation_pct": null,
"portfolio_role": null,
"date": "2026-07-03",
"version": "v6",
"macro_report_date": "2026-07-03",
"economic_alignment_source": "sector-map",
"economic_alignment_stance": "Trend-Following",
"economic_alignment_pressure": "Tailwind",
"economic_alignment_conviction": 55,
"sector_map": "XLK \u2192 Outperform (Short/Medium/Long); tempered for extreme valuation + Contested regime",
"signals": {
"short": {
"signal": "HOLD",
"score": 42,
"confidence": 48
},
"medium": {
"signal": "HOLD",
"score": 45,
"confidence": 50
},
"long": {
"signal": "HOLD",
"score": 47,
"confidence": 48
}
},
"pillars": {
"business_quality": {
"score": 44,
"confidence": 55
},
"valuation": {
"score": 20,
"confidence": 65
},
"timing": {
"score": 40,
"confidence": 55
},
"drivers": {
"score": 62,
"confidence": 55
},
"economic_alignment": {
"score": 55,
"confidence": 55
}
},
"warranted_multiple": "na",
"actual_multiple": 62.0,
"val_multiple_basis": "EV/Revenue (forward, FY26 guide $265M) \u2014 pre-profit, no clean P/E; guardrail floor governs",
"discount_rate_r": "na (pre-profit \u2014 anchor not computed)",
"risk_free_10y": 4.48,
"g_near": "na (pre-profit)",
"g_term": "na (pre-profit)",
"warranted_ratio": "na",
"val_band": "expensive",
"ev_rev_forward": 62.0,
"ev_rev_trailing": 88.0,
"sector_guardrail_line_ev_rev": 20,
"competitive_named_rivals": [
"Quantinuum",
"IBM",
"Google Quantum AI",
"PsiQuantum",
"Rigetti (RGTI)",
"D-Wave (QBTS)",
"Infleqtion",
"Oxford Ionics (acquired)"
],
"competitive_share_trajectory": "Pre-commercial industry, no established share to defend; race is which architecture reaches useful error-corrected scale first (~2028\u20132032). IonQ: fidelity/full-stack advantage vs deep-pocketed superconducting (IBM/Google) and photonic (PsiQuantum) rivals and trapped-ion peer Quantinuum.",
"competitive_moat_avg": 50,
"gates": {
"financial_distress": "caution (neg-FCF arm met but ~9yr cash runway offsets)",
"earnings_event": "clear (Q2 ~6 Aug, outside 14d)",
"valuation_ceiling": "triggered (EV/Rev 57\u201396x \u2265 20x IT guardrail; caps at HOLD)",
"dilution_accounting": "triggered (+65% YoY shares; SBC ~200% of rev; +$1.1B non-op warrant gain inflates net income; caps at HOLD)",
"regulatory_binary": "clear"
},
"dnb_triggers": {
"trigger_1_leverage": "clear (net cash)",
"trigger_2_valuation_extreme": "NEAR-MISS \u2014 arm (a) numerically qualifies (57\u201395x EV/Rev is \u22651.5\u00d7 the 30x threshold) but NOT fired, held back deliberately by exceptional+proven top-line growth + $470M contracted RPO; arm (b) not fired (no live structural threat; IONQ not in AI-concentration cohort so systemic tail not inherited). A hair from DO-NOT-BUY.",
"trigger_3_negative_revisions": "clear (estimates rising)",
"trigger_4_insider_selling": "clear (routine RSU-tax / pre-arranged 10b5-1 sales, low-thousands of shares; not the >25%-of-holdings non-plan pattern)",
"trigger_5_structural_threat": "clear (competition is a slow risk, not a live catalyst)"
},
"dnb_fired": false,
"signal_override_chain": "Base matrix (Expensive col \u2192 HOLD) \u2192 amplification (HOLD not amplified) \u2192 Gates 3+4 cap at HOLD \u2192 no DNB \u2192 final HOLD all horizons",
"price_at_rating": 49.12,
"fair_value_estimate": 40,
"stop_loss": 39,
"scenario_base_target": 50,
"scenario_bull_target": 78,
"scenario_bear_target": 25,
"scenario_probabilities": {
"bull": 25,
"base": 50,
"bear": 25
},
"scenario_weighted_fair_value": 50.75,
"entry_groups_met": 0,
"entry_conviction": "Wait",
"exit_groups_live": 0,
"exit_action": "Hold",
"next_update_date": "2026-07-17",
"next_update_basis": "default +14d \u2014 no outlook-changing event inside the 2-week window (FOMC ~29-30 Jul, Q2 earnings ~6 Aug both just outside); high-beta spec re-checked at the cap",
"key_financials": {
"price": 49.12,
"market_cap": 18335019846,
"enterprise_value_fmp_ttm": 17871924846,
"cash_and_investments": 3100000000,
"ttm_revenue": 187118000,
"fy26_revenue_guide": "260-270M",
"q1_2026_revenue": 64668000,
"q1_2026_revenue_growth_yoy": "+755%",
"q1_2026_operating_income": -271507000,
"q1_2026_reported_net_income": 805360000,
"q1_2026_nonop_warrant_gain": 1100000000,
"fy26_adj_ebitda_loss_guide": "-330M to -310M",
"rpo": 470000000,
"rpo_growth_yoy": "+554%",
"sbc_q1_2026": 128500000,
"shares_wtd_q1_2026": 358822219,
"shares_wtd_q4_2024": 217948000,
"beta": 3.184,
"price_target_consensus": 67.13,
"price_target_high": 85,
"price_target_low": 48.5,
"grades": "3 Buy / 3 Hold (Buy)",
"fmp_health_rating": "B (3/5)"
}
}
First report — coverage initiated as a Donatien Pick (operator conviction add; permanent hold until manually removed, protected from finder-sync Stops). Signal HOLD across all three horizons: a base HOLD from the Expensive valuation column, with Gates 3 (Valuation Ceiling) and 4 (Dilution/Accounting) both firing to cap at HOLD, and DNB Trigger 2 arm-(a) a deliberate near-miss (held back only by the $470M contracted RPO + exceptional proven top-line growth). Real secular driver, fortress balance sheet, genuinely extreme valuation — a speculative Watch.