  Recent work [Sachdeva et al.] presented an iterative hybrid quantum
variational optimization algorithm designed by Q-CTRL and executed on IBM
gate-based quantum processing units (QPUs), claiming a significant performance
advantage against a D-Wave quantum annealer. Here we point out major
methodological problems with this comparison. Using a simple unoptimized
workflow for quantum annealing, we show success probabilities multiple orders
of magnitude higher than those reported by [Sachdeva et al.]. These results,
which can be reproduced using open-source code and free trial access to a
D-Wave quantum annealer, contradict Q-CTRL's claims of superior performance. We
also provide a direct comparison between quantum annealing and a recent
demonstration of digitized quantum annealing on an IBM processor, showing that
analog quantum annealing on a D-Wave QPU reaches far lower energies than
digitized quantum annealing on an IBM QPU.
