This is a Scorecard review, revisiting a past LF0 research call against what actually happened.
Ticker: QUBT Rating: Sell Published: 2026-07-24 Checkpoint: 2026-10-24 Entry price: $7.43 Latest price: $6.56 as of 2026-10-23 Stock return since entry: -11.7% Signal return: +11.7% Verdict: Correct so far
This is the 3-month checkpoint for this call. LF0 publishes monthly Scorecard updates through month 6, using the closest available daily close on or before the checkpoint date.
Previous checkpoint: our 2-month review (2026-09-24) was incorrect (stock return +23.3% since entry). Each monthly review is judged on its own date, so the verdict can change from one month to the next.
Read the original LF0 analysis
What I Said
I rated QUBT a Sell because I thought the company’s photonics story was still ahead of the economics: the business had shown a revenue step-up, but the margin and cash-flow profile still looked far from self-funding. I also said the Luminar acquisition and the AZ Chips Facility would need to translate into repeatable quarterly revenue above $3M without making losses worse before I would get more constructive. The core of my call was that the burden of proof was still on management to show this was becoming a real operating business rather than a development platform.
Peer Comparison
| Company | Return Since Entry |
|---|---|
| QUBT (this call) | -11.7% |
| IONQ | -4.8% |
| QBTS | -28.1% |
| RGTI | -18.6% |
Why It’s Working (Or Not)
Over this tracking window, a short position would have earned 11.7%, so the Sell call has worked to date. QUBT is down from my entry price, and that move is consistent with my view that the market was still asking for proof rather than paying up for the story. The peer set has also been mixed to lower, with IONQ, QBTS, and RGTI all down over the same stretch, which fits a cautious read on the group rather than a one-off collapse in QUBT alone. The specific part of my thesis that has held up is the idea that the company still needed to convert its strategic assets into durable commercial traction before the valuation could be defended.
What Could Still Prove Me Wrong
If QUBT can keep quarterly revenue above $3M for the next two quarters and show gross margin turning positive, that would weaken my argument that the Q1 2026 step-up was not durable. I would also reconsider if operating cash flow improves materially from the -$35.3M TTM run rate, because that would suggest the business is moving toward self-funding. A return to sub-$2M quarterly revenue would reinforce my bearish view instead of challenging it.
The July 2026 Cohort
Other directional calls published the same month:
| Ticker | Rating | Entry | Latest | Stock Return | Signal Return | Verdict |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| NLST | Sell | $2.44 | $5.87 | +140.6% | -140.6% | Incorrect so far |
| BMNR | Sell | $17.74 | $22.40 | +26.3% | -26.3% | Incorrect so far |
| FTNT | Sell | $156.25 | $179.99 | +15.2% | -15.2% | Incorrect so far |
| RDW | Sell | $8.99 | $8.36 | -7.0% | +7.0% | Correct so far |
| VSAT | Sell | $69.54 | $61.47 | -11.6% | +11.6% | Correct so far |
| UAN | Buy | $110.58 | $125.44 | +13.4% | +13.4% | Correct so far |
| TPL | Sell | $408.26 | $338.26 | -17.1% | +17.1% | Correct so far |
| TTWO | Sell | $247.62 | $203.69 | -17.7% | +17.7% | Correct so far |
| MYRG | Sell | $391.51 | $254.49 | -35.0% | +35.0% | Correct so far |
| AMKR | Sell | $60.60 | $39.30 | -35.1% | +35.1% | Correct so far |
| HUT | Sell | $98.33 | $61.23 | -37.7% | +37.7% | Correct so far |
| ONTO | Sell | $319.32 | $198.68 | -37.8% | +37.8% | Correct so far |
| MARA | Sell | $11.67 | $7.02 | -39.8% | +39.8% | Correct so far |
| RCAT | Sell | $7.83 | $4.43 | -43.4% | +43.4% | Correct so far |
| MTZ | Sell | $380.63 | $171.05 | -55.1% | +55.1% | Correct so far |
| SMR | Strong Sell | $8.81 | $5.38 | -38.9% | +58.4% | Correct so far |
| FLNC | Sell | $14.42 | $5.59 | -61.2% | +61.2% | Correct so far |
| CIFR | Sell | $21.85 | $7.94 | -63.7% | +63.7% | Correct so far |
Sector Scorecard: Technology
How are our Technology calls doing overall, and where does QUBT sit among them?
| Peer call | Rating | Published | Signal return |
|---|---|---|---|
| CIFR | Sell | 2026-07-08 | +63.7% |
| AEHR | Sell | 2026-06-18 | +52.0% |
| SOUN | Sell | 2026-06-14 | +39.6% |
| ONTO | Sell | 2026-07-14 | +37.8% |
| ICHR | Sell | 2026-09-27 | +36.1% |
| SMTC | Strong Sell | 2026-10-13 | +35.4% |
| AMKR | Sell | 2026-07-27 | +35.1% |
| LRCX | Sell | 2026-08-16 | +33.0% |
Across the league table, Industrials led with 14 calls, an 86% hit rate, and a +25.8% average signal return, while Technology was close behind with 24 calls, an 88% hit rate, and a +16.6% average signal return. The best hit rate among the non-thin sectors was Communication Services at 100% on 5 calls, and the weakest average return was Energy at +3.8% with a 75% hit rate. The best single call was Technology’s CIFR at +63.7%, while the worst was Technology’s NLST at -140.6%. Thin sectors were not ranked, and Real Estate and Unclassified each had 2 calls.
Sector League Table
| Sector | Calls | Hit rate | Avg signal return | Best | Worst |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industrials | 14 | 86% | +25.8% | BW +76.6% | CAR -13.6% |
| Utilities | 3 | 67% | +20.2% | FLNC +61.2% | AES -2.0% |
| Financial Services | 4 | 75% | +18.6% | MARA +39.8% | BMNR -26.3% |
| Communication Services | 5 | 100% | +16.7% | LUMN +26.7% | GTN +5.2% |
| Technology | 24 | 88% | +16.6% | CIFR +63.7% | NLST -140.6% |
| Basic Materials | 4 | 75% | +14.6% | LAR +36.7% | GFI -3.1% |
| Consumer Cyclical | 3 | 100% | +13.6% | PENN +21.9% | OI +4.7% |
| Healthcare | 7 | 71% | +12.0% | CUE +30.8% | SDGR -36.8% |
| Energy | 4 | 75% | +3.8% | TPL +17.1% | VNOM -12.7% |
| Real Estate* | 2 | 50% | +16.6% | SRG +34.8% | SKYH -1.7% |
| Unclassified* | 2 | 50% | +5.9% | NXE +21.6% | FISV -9.9% |
\* Fewer than 3 calls: not ranked.
Sector by Publish Month
| Sector | Jun 2026 | Jul 2026 | Aug 2026 | Sep 2026 | Oct 2026 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Technology | +45.8% (2) | +0.6% (7) | +22.8% (3) | +25.1% (6) | +13.9% (6) |
| Industrials | +76.6% (1) | +39.8% (5) | +6.6% (2) | +7.3% (3) | +17.0% (3) |
| Healthcare | -5.1% (1) | — | +11.7% (5) | +30.8% (1) | — |
| Communication Services | — | +17.7% (1) | +15.6% (2) | +7.6% (1) | +26.7% (1) |
| Financial Services | — | +17.1% (3) | — | — | +23.0% (1) |
| Basic Materials | — | +13.4% (1) | — | +36.7% (1) | +4.1% (2) |
| Energy | — | +17.1% (1) | -12.7% (1) | +0.9% (1) | +9.8% (1) |
| Consumer Cyclical | — | — | +13.6% (3) | — | — |
| Utilities | — | +61.2% (1) | -2.0% (1) | — | +1.2% (1) |
| Unclassified | — | — | +21.6% (1) | — | -9.9% (1) |
| Real Estate | -1.7% (1) | — | +34.8% (1) | — | — |
Each cell: average signal return to date of the calls published that month (calls in brackets). Signal return is direction-adjusted, so a positive number means our call is right.
Live LF0 scorecard: The Scorecard | Research Performance dashboard
Past performance does not guarantee future results. Nothing here is investment advice or a recommendation to buy or sell securities. Returns use LF0’s daily-close scorecard methodology.
Leave a Comment