!
You're viewing papers too quickly. Please wait a moment.<br>This helps keep the archive available for everyone.

Quick Navigation

Topics

Quantum Optimization Quantum Machine Learning

A Comparative Study of Hybrid Quantum and Classical Genetic Algorithms in Portfolio Optimization

arXiv
Authors: Romeu Rossi Junior, José Augusto Miranda Nacif, Leonardo Antônio Mendes Souza, Marcus Henrique Soares Mendes

Year

2026

Paper ID

48913

Status

Preprint

Abstract Read

~2 min

Abstract Words

71

Citations

N/A

Abstract

This work investigates the performance of a Hybrid Quantum Genetic Algorithm (HQGA) compared to a classical Genetic Algorithm (GA) for solving the portfolio optimization problem. Our results indicate that the HQGA converges faster to the optimal solution than its classical counterpart, while also maintaining a higher level of population diversity throughout the optimization process. In addition, the HQGA requires significantly fewer evaluations-to-solution than a brute-force approach to reach the global optimum.

Why This Paper Matters

  • This paper contributes to the Quantum Machine Learning research area in the Quantum Articles archive.
  • It adds a 2026 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
  • This work investigates the performance of a Hybrid Quantum Genetic Algorithm (HQGA) compared to a classical Genetic Algorithm (GA) for solving the portfolio optimization problem.

Paper Tools

Become a member to use research tools

Sign in to open papers, visit source links, share, cite, compare, copy DOI links, request category corrections, and build your reading list.

Show Paper arXiv Publisher Share Cite This Paper Copy URL Compare Copy DOI Add to Reading List Category Correction Request

References & Citation Signals

Local Citation Graph (Related-Paper Links)

Current Paper #48913 #75729 How Quantum Is the Advantage? A...

External citation index: OpenAlex citation signal

Community Reactions

Quick sentiment from readers on this paper.

Score: 0
Likes: 0 Dislikes: 0

Sign in to react to this paper.

Discussion & Reviews (Moderated)

Average Rating: 0.0 / 5 (0 ratings)

No written reviews yet.