Classiq vs Zapata Quantum
Classiq vs Zapata Quantum, compared side by side on 22 data points: what each one does, how big it is, what it has raised, the tech running each site, and what users report. We score both out of 100 on traction, team and visibility: Classiq is on 61/100 and Zapata Quantum on 59/100.
Where each one leads
Classiq
- agent readiness: 39/100 against 30/100
- domain rating: 66/100 against 54/100
- headcount: 129 against 10
- funding raised: $195M against $89.1M
Zapata Quantum
Leads on none of the measures we hold for both companies.
At a glance
| Measure | Classiq | Zapata Quantum |
|---|---|---|
| What it is | Quantum computing software platform for designing and optimizing quantum circuits. | Quantum computing application and algorithm development |
| Category | Quantum Computing, Quantum Software, Semiconductor Design Automation, Algorithm Design | Quantum Computing, Artificial Intelligence, Quantum Software, Algorithm Development |
| Sells toBusiness model | B2B | B2B |
| Offering | Software | Software |
| Founded | 2020 | 2017 |
| Headquarters | Tel Aviv, Israel | Boston, USA |
| Status | Active | Active |
Size, funding and growth
| Measure | Classiq | Zapata Quantum |
|---|---|---|
| Employees | 129 | 10 |
| Headcount growthLast 12 months | +29.7% | Not published |
| Total funding | $195M | $89.1M |
| Latest round | Series C | Strategic Financing |
| Valuation | $450M | $1.1B |
| LinkedIn followers | 22,493 | 18,360 |
StartupHub scores
Our own 0-100 ratings. They measure company strength and site quality, not which product suits you.
| Measure | Classiq | Zapata Quantum |
|---|---|---|
| StartupHub scoreOur 0-100 rating | 61/100 | 59/100 |
| Traction | 60/100 | 50/100 |
| Team | 70/100 | 70/100 |
| Community | Not published | 8/100 |
| Search visibility | 28/100 | 39/100 |
| Quality | 65/100 | 68/100 |
| Agent readinessHow well an AI agent can read and act on the site | F (39/100) | F (30/100) |
| Domain ratingLink authority, 0-100 | 66/100 | 54/100 |
Technology
Detected on each public site, so it reflects the marketing stack as well as the product.
| Measure | Classiq | Zapata Quantum |
|---|---|---|
| Hosting | Not detected | OVH |
| CDN | Cloudflare | Not detected |
| CMS | Webflow | WordPress |
| Frameworks | Not detected | Jquery |
| Analytics | Google Tag Manager | Google Analytics 4, Google Tag Manager |
| Support stack | HubSpot | Not detected |
| Open source | Yes | No |
Classiq vs Zapata Quantum: common questions
Which is better, Classiq or Zapata Quantum?
On our 0-100 score Classiq rates higher (61/100 against 59/100). The score weights traction, team, visibility and profile completeness, so it reflects company strength rather than which product suits you. We compare the two on 22 data points above: read the rows that match what you are buying for.
How do Classiq and Zapata Quantum compare on the numbers?
Classiq leads on agent readiness (39/100 against 30/100), domain rating (66/100 against 54/100), headcount (129 against 10), funding raised ($195M against $89.1M).
Read the full Classiq review and pricing or the Zapata Quantum review and pricing. You can also browse other Classiq alternatives we track.