IOTA is the only chain in the batch that once ran hash-based signatures and then migrated away from them. Winternitz One-Time Signatures were PQ-resistant; Ed25519 is not. The quantum-resistant heritage is real. The current mainnet is not.
Summary
IOTA is the anomaly of the batch: originally shipped hash-based Winternitz One-Time Signatures (2016-2021), migrated AWAY from them to Ed25519 in Chrysalis (2021) for ecosystem compatibility, and is now planning hash-based reintroduction in IOTA 2.0 roadmap. Rebased (May 2025) moved to Move VM on a new DPoS chain. Current mainnet is Ed25519 (Shor-vulnerable), but the crypto-migration track record is the strongest in this batch: three protocol-level hard forks with crypto scheme changes. Migration architecture score is Band 3 (Intentional) not higher because no NIST PQC (ML-DSA/SLH-DSA) is currently deployed despite the ecosystem's PQ-friendly heritage.
What the gates say
- Hybrid: FAIL. No hybrid plan on file.
- Evidence: PASS. Sources reconstructable by third party.
- Primitive naming: PASS. Named primitives at every scored sub-level.
Burn-vs-rescue policy on file
undeclared
Seven dimensions
Each dimension scores 0-100 internally; the weighted roll-up produces the QRI on the left. Open a row to read the sub-score detail.
1 Cryptographic Exposure 45 / 100
Unique crypto history: IOTA originally shipped hash-based WOTS signatures (2016-2021), migrated AWAY from them to Ed25519 in Chrysalis (2021), and planned PQ-hash reintroduction in IOTA 2.0 roadmap (unclear if shipped post-Rebased).
Ed25519 (current, since Chrysalis 2021 and Rebased 2025) · WOTS / Winternitz One-Time Signatures (historical, 2016-2021) · BLAKE2b (hashing) · Kerl/Keccak (historical) · Poseidon (some zk integrations)HISTORICAL hash-based WOTS is a unique data point. Current mainnet is Ed25519 only. No NIST PQC standard deployed.
WOTS is not NIST-standardized. Hash-based schemes like SLH-DSA/XMSS are NIST-standardized but IOTA does not use them.
2 HNDL Exposure 20 / 100
Current Ed25519 addresses fully exposed on first tx. IOTA 2.0 planned account abstraction + signature agility (implementation status unclear post-Rebased).
Long-dormant Chrysalis-era Ed25519 keys from 2021+ are quantum-exposed. Pre-2021 WOTS addresses were hash-based.
DAG history includes WOTS-signed transactions (PQ-safe) and Ed25519 since Chrysalis (Shor-vulnerable).
Standard TLS. No PQC KEM documented.
3 Metadata & Privacy Exposure 30 / 100
DAG transaction graph visible. Pseudonymous.
Rebased DPoS has limited validator set; Foundation and partners run major endpoints.
IOTA bridges to Ethereum/BSC; some correlation risk.
Historical WOTS tx in pre-Chrysalis DAG are hash-based (PQ-resistant at signature layer). Post-Chrysalis Ed25519 tx retroactively de-anonymizable under Shor.
4 Migration Architecture 55 / 100
IOTA has the most extensive crypto-migration track record in this batch: WOTS -> Ed25519 (Chrysalis 2021), Ed25519 -> MoveVM (Rebased 2025). Demonstrated ability to execute breaking crypto changes.
Move-based IOTA Rebased inherits Sui-style AA primitives. Signature scheme agility at account layer.
Successful Chrysalis + Stardust + Rebased upgrades. Foundation-coordinated hard forks with multi-year horizons.
IOTA 2.0 white paper discusses PQ signature schemes. Rebased Move VM could accommodate hybrid envelopes. Implementation status of published PQ plan unclear.
5 Deployment Execution 10 / 100
Technical ambiguity: historical WOTS sigs remain verifiable in DAG but new tx are Ed25519-only. PQC-washing risk if 'IOTA is quantum-resistant' is claimed based on heritage not current state.
WOTS verification logic likely retained for historical tx compatibility. No NIST PQC (SLH-DSA/ML-DSA) in client.
No validator PQC keys.
White paper mention; no dated production milestone found.
PQC-washing risk: marketing around 'IOTA quantum resistance' often references historical WOTS, not current Ed25519 mainnet. Delta of ~1.6x plausible.
6 Supply Chain Vendor Readiness 6 / 100
7 Governance & Coordination 40 / 100
Rebased DPoS limited validator set; Foundation-aligned.
Multiple successful protocol-level crypto migrations (Chrysalis, Stardust, Rebased). Strong hard-fork execution history.
IOTA Foundation (Dominik Schiener). Research team active on cryptography and DLT.
2017 Curl-P / vulnerability response showed willingness to migrate primitives quickly. Coordinator migration demonstrated adversarial coordination capability.
The X + Y vs Z inequality
X (data shelf life): 5-15 (historical WOTS addresses dormant; Ed25519 since 2021)
Y (migration time): 6-10 (Foundation has shown fast hard-fork capability)
Z10 (10% CRQC year): 2036 · Z50 (50%): 2041
Verdict: X+Y > Z (danger).
Four-scenario grid
| Scenario | Value preserved | Privacy preserved |
|---|---|---|
| quantum never | 100% | 100% |
| arrives suddenly pre migration | 15% | 25% |
| arrives slowly post migration | 90% | 75% |
| arrives slowly mid migration | 60% | 50% |
Peers in the L1 profile
Order-book view of the 9 chains closest to IOTA by QRI.
Public artifacts used for this scorecard
Each entry below is a sub-score citation. Clicking the link takes you to the public source. A third party should be able to reconstruct every number on this page from these URLs in 48 hours.
Unique crypto history: IOTA originally shipped hash-based WOTS signatures (2016-2021), migrated AWAY from them to Ed25519 in Chrysalis (2021), and planned PQ-hash reintroduction in IOTA 2.0 roadmap (unclear if shipped post-Rebased).
IOTA has the most extensive crypto-migration track record in this batch: WOTS -> Ed25519 (Chrysalis 2021), Ed25519 -> MoveVM (Rebased 2025). Demonstrated ability to execute breaking crypto changes.
Technical ambiguity: historical WOTS sigs remain verifiable in DAG but new tx are Ed25519-only. PQC-washing risk if 'IOTA is quantum-resistant' is claimed based on heritage not current state.
Supply chain snapshot
A chain's supply chain cannot migrate faster than its slowest dependency. Zero PQC roadmaps in any of the four categories is a structural blocker, not a lagging indicator.
Analyst notes on the scoring
IOTA is the headline surprise of this 25-chain batch. Historical WOTS deployment (2016-2021) is a genuine hash-based PQ-resistant signature scheme. The paradox is that the ecosystem migrated AWAY from hash-based PQ-resistance toward Ed25519 (Shor-vulnerable) for compatibility reasons. IOTA 2.0 white paper discusses PQ reintroduction but current mainnet is Ed25519. PQC-washing risk: 'IOTA is quantum-resistant' claims based on heritage rather than current deployment. Band 3 Intentional reflects strong track record + roadmap intent; no higher due to absent current NIST-PQC deployment.
Scorecard metadata
- Profile: L1
- Scored: 2026-04-18 by
layerqu-v2-scoring-agent-3 - v1 reference:
chainscreen-v1-archive - QRI raw: 32 · after caps: 32
- Confidence interval: ±12
- PQC washing ratio: 1.6x
- Burn-vs-rescue: undeclared
Caps triggered
- Mosca (5a<20% → QRI max 60)
- Sutor (5d count=1 — Migration Stage max 2)
- Casado (3+ vendor tiles pqc=0 → migration_stage max 3)
- Hybrid gate FAIL → QRI cap 60