In this sense QM is more a pragmatic theory than a realist theory.
In popular jargon people normally believe "pragmatic" and "realistic" to be synonyms, but they're not.
Scientists are supported by the public, I believe in part, because they claim to have discovered new and interesting things like electrons, quarks, black holes, etc. But all they've really been doing is coming up with mathematical formulas to predict what their future measurements will be.
Yes. Science has come up with predictive formulae - about future measurements. And it’s fascinating how accurate some of these predictions are. That we csm observe aspects we term electrons, black holes, etc does at least inform us more about nature than we previously understood. What is reality? What is real? Were observed phenomenon “real” or even “the same, essentially” before we observed them? I don’t know.