Anti-quantum Bitcoin vs ETH: Nic Carter warns BTC lags while Ethereum targets 2029

Published: 2026-03-26 07:15:59 |

Crypto entrepreneur Nic Carter says anti-quantum Bitcoin development is behind Ethereum. He argues Bitcoin’s ECC-based security still faces a long-term quantum computing threat, but BTC devs remain slow and ignore related proposals such as BIP-360. Carter points to the hard-coded nature of cryptography in Bitcoin code and says the network needs a “complete redesign” to add cryptographic agility. He contrasts this with Ethereum’s progress: Ethereum has a new security team working on post-quantum changes and has published a detailed roadmap through 2029, described as a top strategic priority. Vitalik Buterin previously said quantum resilience requires changes to verifier signatures, data storage, account/proof mechanisms. Carter also cites a Castle Island Ventures view that elliptic-curve cryptography may become obsolete, and that developers must acknowledge the risk. Separately, Google reaffirmed its post-quantum migration deadline for 2029 and warned that quantum computers could significantly threaten existing cryptographic standards, especially digital signatures. For traders, the key theme is anti-quantum Bitcoin vs ETH positioning: if markets interpret BTC’s slow pace as higher risk, ETHBTC could see relative strength, even if the quantum timeline is “long-term.”

Bearish

This news is framed as a credibility/risk narrative: anti-quantum Bitcoin is portrayed as lagging, with potential execution delays and disputed proposal support (e.g., BIP-360). Even though quantum risk is labeled “long-term,” traders often price in relative development risk before technical milestones are met. That can pressure BTC sentiment and strengthen the ETH relative trade (ETHBTC) as Ethereum markets its 2029 roadmap more clearly. In the short term, the story may trigger rotations into ETH and out of BTC on headlines about “cryptographic agility” and dev prioritization. In the long term, if Bitcoin eventually adopts a viable post-quantum upgrade path, the bearish impact could fade; however, until concrete timelines and implementations are visible, uncertainty remains. Similar past market behavior shows that when flagship networks face perceived “fundamental roadmap” delays, relative performance can shift rapidly even without immediate protocol changes—especially around high-salience themes like cryptography and security.