BlackRock Bitcoin
warning
In a rare move, BlackRock has quietly added a new line to
its iShares Bitcoin Trust (IBIT) filing — and it is turning heads.
The update, submitted in early May 2025, flags quantum computing as
a potential risk to Bitcoin’s long-term security.
The filing specifically warns that if quantum tech advances far
enough, it could
break the cryptographic systems that secure Bitcoin.
In their words, it could “undermine the viability” of the
cryptographic algorithms used not just in digital assets but across
the global tech stack.
It’s the first time you’ve seen the world’s largest asset
manager call out this threat so directly in a Bitcoin-related
disclosure, and it says a lot about how seriously institutional
players are starting to take future-proofing
crypto.
Yes, exchange-traded
fund (ETF) risk disclosures tend to be exhaustive by nature.
But the fact that quantum computing made the cut (alongside more
common concerns like volatility and regulatory shifts) suggests
it’s no longer just a hypothetical issue in the eyes of big
finance.
For investors, this signals two things: first, that Bitcoin
isn’t immune to emerging tech threats, and second, that
institutional players like BlackRock are actively weighing those
risks as they build long-term strategies in crypto.
The message is clear: If the industry wants to stay ahead,
preparing for a post-quantum world can’t wait.

Did you know? As of early 2025, BlackRock
manages over $11.6 trillion in assets, making it the largest asset
manager globally. To put that in perspective, BlackRock’s assets
under management exceed the combined GDP of Germany and
France.
Bitcoin quantum risk: Is
it real?
Quantum computers work differently from the laptops and
servers we use today. Instead of crunching numbers one at a time,
they can process huge numbers of possibilities at once. That makes
them incredibly powerful — especially when it comes to cracking
codes.
Bitcoin’s security relies on two major cryptographic systems:
SHA-256 and ECDSA. In plain terms, these are the tools that
secure your Bitcoin address and make sure only you can authorize
transactions. They’ve worked flawlessly for years, but quantum
computers could change that.
Here’s the worry: A powerful enough quantum computer might be
able to reverse-engineer
your private key from your public address, especially during
that short window after you’ve broadcast a transaction but before
it’s confirmed on the blockchain. If that ever became possible,
someone could hijack your transaction and steal your coins.
That sounds dramatic, but it’s not an immediate threat. Most
researchers agree they’re still at least 10-20 years away from
quantum machines that could actually pull this off. The tech just
isn’t there yet — not at the scale or stability needed to break
Bitcoin’s cryptography.
Still, the warning signs are flashing. Roughly a quarter of
existing Bitcoin (BTC) sits in older
wallet formats that could be more vulnerable if quantum leaps
happen faster than expected. And even if the timeline is long, the
crypto community knows it has to act early. Work is already
underway on
post-quantum cryptography, which is a security system that
could stand up to the next generation of computing.

Did you know? Quantum computers can, in
theory, solve certain problems exponentially faster than classical
computers. For instance, Google’s Sycamore processor completed a
specific task in 200 seconds, whereas it would take even the most
advanced classical supercomputers approximately 10,000 years to
finish.
Is Bitcoin safe from
quantum computing?
While quantum computing still feels like a future problem,
the crypto industry is already gearing up for it, and the efforts
underway are more serious than most people realize.
What Bitcoin’s doing (and not doing yet)
Changing the protocol behind a blockchain is never simple; you
need broad consensus, careful testing and a long lead time. But
that hasn’t stopped developers from floating ideas regarding
Bitcoin.
One of the most talked-about proposals is something called
QRAMP, the Quantum-Resistant Address Migration Protocol. The idea
is to push users to move their coins from older, potentially
vulnerable wallet formats into addresses protected by newer,
quantum-safe algorithms. It would require a hard fork, so it’s no
small lift, but it’s a serious plan to future-proof the network
before a so-called “Q-Day” sneaks up.
Who’s already ahead?
Some blockchains aren’t waiting around. Algorand, for example,
has already integrated
Falcon, a post-quantum digital signature algorithm that’s been
officially vetted by the US National Institute of Standards and
Technology (NIST). That means transactions on Algorand are already
being backed by encryption that could hold up even if quantum
machines go live tomorrow.
The Quantum Resistant Ledger (QRL) is another big one. It was
built from day one with this threat in mind, using XMSS (a
hash-based signature scheme) instead of traditional cryptography.
It’s not a major player in market cap terms, but it’s one of the
most advanced projects in terms of pure security design.
Why it’s not easy
Of course, none of this is simple to implement. Quantum-safe
cryptography often comes with trade-offs. Algorithms like Falcon
are compact and efficient, but they still require more computing
resources than traditional ones.
Moreover, switching everyone — miners, exchanges, wallet apps
and individual users — to a new cryptographic standard could be a
logistical nightmare unless it’s planned years in advance.
Plus, there’s a delicate balance to strike. Move too soon, and
you risk breaking things or relying on tech that isn’t
battle-tested. Wait too long, and you’re exposed.
That’s why many in the space are eyeing a 10-to-20-year window
as a rough estimate for when quantum computing becomes a real
threat. But even then, nobody wants to be the last to prepare.
Bitcoin’s future and
quantum computing
If there’s one lesson from quantum conversation so far, it’s
this: Being early matters. When it comes to tech that could one day
rewrite the rules of digital security, waiting around just isn’t an
option.
So, what does preparation look like?
For developers, it starts with testing and integrating
quantum-resistant algorithms into existing systems. Some are
already experimenting with “hybrid” approaches, using both
traditional and post-quantum cryptography side by side, so networks
aren’t caught off guard if (or when) Q-Day arrives.
For crypto businesses — exchanges, custodians and wallet
providers — the job is twofold: Make sure your infrastructure is
future-proof, and make sure your users know what’s coming.
Education and UX will play a huge role here. Migrating keys and
updating protocols isn’t something the average holder can or should
do alone.
And then there’s the regulatory side — maybe not the most
exciting part of crypto, but an absolutely critical one in this
context.
You are already seeing movement: The NIST finalized several
post-quantum cryptographic standards in 2024. That gives the
industry a starting point, a common language to build around. But
what’s still missing is a clear regulatory push that says, “Here’s
how and when this should happen.”
Good policy here wouldn’t mean clamping down on innovation — it
would mean supporting it. Think: funding open-source research,
incentivizing post-quantum upgrades and creating frameworks that
help institutions adopt secure standards without killing
momentum.
Did you know? The US government began preparing for the quantum
threat as far back as 2016, and in 2024, the NIST’s move was
sparked by growing fears that quantum computers could one day break
the encryption protecting everything from Bitcoin to national
security infrastructure.
A slow burn
BlackRock didn’t need to bring up quantum risk in its ETF filing
— but it did. And when a company of that size puts it in writing,
it turns vague rumors into something much more real.
The transition to a quantum-resistant crypto world isn’t going
to happen overnight. It’ll be messy, slow and full of tough
technical choices. But it has to happen.
Finally, waiting until quantum computers are actively breaking
SHA-256 in the wild would already be too late.
...