As the notorious Q-Day approaches, blockchain and security experts are backing Ethereum (ETH) as a way to face fewer risks than Bitcoin (BTC). This follows growing community debates about the best approach each asset can take, given its structure.
Citi Weighs In On Quantum Risks
In a new research note, global financial giant Citi warned that Bitcoin holders are more exposed to quantum threats. The core difference between the two top blockchains is governance. This stresses the bottlenecks Bitcoin devs would face in the coming years to beat the projected deadline.
According to the analysts, Ethereum and most proof-of-stake networks stand a good chance due to their simple governance. Decisions and network changes are easier to make than on other blockchains.
These networks also boast a history of upgrades backed by the majority. A notable example was the Ethereum Merge, which saw the blockchain transition to a proof-of-stake mechanism. Although not out of the danger zone, they stand a better chance of achieving community consensus.
It should be noted that if an attacker holds 33% of staked assets, disruptions can occur, leading to loss of funds. The Ethereum community has made progress in preparation for the quantum era.



 In January, ETH researcher Justin Drake notes that preparations were in place to prevent potential quantum attacks over the next few years. The newly commissioned team was tasked with developing a strategy and implementing goals to achieve the objective.
“We’ve formed a new Post Quantum (PQ) team, led by the brilliant Thomas Coratger (@tcoratger). Joining him is Emile, one of the world-class talents behind leanVM. leanVM is the cryptographic cornerstone of our entire post-quantum strategy. After years of quiet R&D, EF management has officially declared PQ security a top strategic priority,” Drake wrote on X.
Furthermore, the Ethereum Foundation committed $2 million toward grants, research, and other initiatives to achieve resistance without any network downtime. Co-founder Vitalik Buterin previously suggested a 20% probability that digital asset cryptography would be breached before 2030.
For Bitcoin, risks are far greater because it’s a lot harder to reach a consensus. Transactions expose public keys, and quantum computers can exploit that brief window.
A move towards quantum resistance is likely to involve a hard fork and extensive experiments, and, historically, the network has remained conservative in changing. There are about 7 million Satoshi-era assets at risk, sparking debates about the right approach for the network.
