Discussing the article: "How We Built the Most Powerful Machine Learning-Powered Trading Platform: The Evolution of MQL and MetaTrader Through Archives, Forums, and Releases" - page 3

[Ryan L Johnson]

Renat Fatkhullin #:

It’s written clearly and plainly: an official and licensed NASDAQ data provider.

We can only operate officially and under licence.

The licence was issued by NASDAQ itself; we have a direct cross-connect to NASDAQ at Equinix NY4.

Thank you. I stand corrected regarding Metquotes data provider licensing─presumably, throughout MT5 For Hedge Funds as well─unless that's handled by Metaquotes MT5 For Hedge Funds broker-dealer partners, I suppose.

Again I say, why isn't the same level of connectivity extended to non-professional/retail MT5 users? (Non-professional data is substantially cheaper than professional data, and surely servicing one individual would be cheaper than servicing an entire hedge fund of traders).

[Ryan L Johnson]

Miguel Angel Vico Alba #:

It already is available to non-professional retail users: https://www.metatrader5.com/en/news/2365

To clarify, MT5 For Hedge Funds isn't limited to NASDAQ:

[Renat Fatkhullin]

Ryan L Johnson #:

Thank you. I admit I was mistaken regarding the licensing of the MetaQuotes data provider — presumably, this also applies to the MT5 For Hedge Funds platform — unless, of course, MetaQuotes’ broker-dealer partners for the MT5 For Hedge Funds platform aren’t handling this, as I understand it.

I’ll ask again: why isn’t the same level of connectivity provided to non-professional/retail MT5 users? (Non-professional data is significantly cheaper than professional data, and, of course, serving a single private individual will cost less than serving an entire hedge fund of traders.)

Most exchanges and market data providers classify their clients into two categories:

• Professional
• Non-Professional

Before using any market data subscription, the user must confirm their trader status as either a non-professional trader or a professional trader.

Typically, a non-professional trader is an individual who uses market data solely for personal purposes, exclusively to manage their personal assets, and does not use it for commercial purposes on behalf of an organisation or for the benefit of third parties. A Professional Trader, on the other hand, refers to an individual or organisation that uses Market Data for commercial or professional purposes, such as for trading, general business activities, making investment decisions on behalf of an employing company, or adding value to the activities of enterprises or organisations. Furthermore, individuals registered as investment advisers or securities professionals, or those engaged in similar activities, are also considered Professional Traders.

The cost of a Market Data subscription may vary significantly between Non-professional and Professional Traders. Users bear full responsibility for providing accurate information regarding their trader status.

[Ryan L Johnson]

Renat Fatkhullin #:

Most exchanges and market data providers classify their clients into two categories:

• Professional
• Non-Professional

Before using any market data subscription, the user must confirm their trader status as either a non-professional trader or a professional trader.

Typically, a non-professional trader is an individual who uses market data solely for personal purposes, exclusively to manage their personal assets, and does not use it for commercial purposes on behalf of an organisation or for the benefit of third parties. A Professional Trader, on the other hand, refers to an individual or organisation that uses Market Data for commercial or professional purposes, such as for trading, general business activities, making investment decisions on behalf of an employing company, or adding value to the activities of enterprises or organisations. Furthermore, individuals registered as investment advisers or securities professionals, or those engaged in similar activities, are also considered Professional Traders.

The cost of a Market Data subscription may vary significantly between Non-professional and Professional Traders. Users bear full responsibility for providing accurate information regarding their trader status.

Yes, I know. I've been trading CME futures in the U.S. for years.

If no one can discuss the multi-market/exchange/broker-dealer/account features of MT5 For Hedge Funds, I understand.

[Miguel Angel Vico Alba]

Ryan L Johnson #:

If no one can discuss the multi-market/exchange/broker-dealer/account features of MT5 For Hedge Funds, I understand.

Those features are publicly described here: https://www.metatrader5.com/en/hedge-funds

MT5 for Hedge Funds is institutional infrastructure; a retail MT5 user connects through the infrastructure and gateways provided by the broker.

If you still consider that your question has not been answered, please ask it again, but be specific about exactly what you want to know. I think this discussion has gone around in circles enough.

[Alexey Volchanskiy]

Igor Zakharev #:
I’ve remembered that story since around 2004 – I watched it unfold from the sidelines. Back then, there was only MT4, whilst MT5 was later promised as something sensational (that’s what the rumours were saying at the time). Back then, it seemed that MT4 was quite sufficient (many people didn’t understand why MT5 was needed at all :) ) and that this was the pinnacle of progress; since then, things have really taken off. Well, over the last 1.5 years, a whole new era has dawned.

I first came across MT4 in 2007. A friend asked me to help her get to grips with the platform, as at some ‘super-trader courses’ held in a dodgy TT ‘kitchen’ in St Petersburg, they were just trying to get money out of her for ‘super-profitable management’ )). I downloaded the terminal, noticed there was some sort of C-like language stub, got curious, and off I went. Back then, MT4 didn’t have structures or proper C-like definitions, and the editor would easily crash from copy-pasting. But you could link C++ DLLs, and I immediately set about building strategies using them. So, we’ve certainly come a long way over the years. It’s a shame that the MT5 tester has remained a bastard child, unloved, with all the parents’ affection going to neural networks and maths libraries.

[Miguel Angel Vico Alba]

Alexey Volchanskiy #:
I first came across MT4 in 2007. A friend asked me to help her get to grips with the platform, as at some ‘super-trader courses’ held in a dodgy TT ‘kitchen’ in St Petersburg, they were just trying to get money out of her for ‘super-profitable management’ )). I downloaded the terminal, noticed there was some sort of C-like language stub, got curious, and off I went. Back then, MT4 didn’t have structures or proper C-like definitions, and the editor would easily crash from copy-pasting. But you could link C++ DLLs, and I immediately set about building strategies using them. So, we’ve certainly come a long way over the years. It’s a shame that the MT5 tester has remained a bastard child, unloved, with all the parents’ affection going to neural networks and maths libraries.

Thanks for your comment, Alexey. It brought back quite a few memories, because I also discovered the platform around 2007/2008, as the subprime crisis was turning into a global financial crisis and many of us suddenly found ourselves out of work. In my case, MetaTrader became something of an escape during those years.

I still remember discovering MT4, MQL4, indicators, EAs, scripts, DLLs...For those of us interested in programming, it was a whole new world to explore.

Anyway, I mainly wanted to thank you for the comment, because it took me straight back to that time.

And I agree with you: MetaQuotes has come a very long way since then, with both good decisions and its fair share of screw-ups. MT5 is probably the best example. Many of us initially wondered why we even needed it, but over time it became clear that it was much more than just a replacement for MT4.

Looking back, it is quite remarkable how much has changed while still keeping much of the original spirit of the platform.

[Alexey Volchanskiy]

Miguel Angel Vico Alba #:

Thank you for your comment, Alexey. It brought back quite a few memories for me, as I too discovered this platform around 2007–2008, when the subprime mortgage crisis escalated into a global financial crisis, and many of us suddenly found ourselves out of work. In my case, MetaTrader became something of a lifeline back then.

I still remember discovering MT4, MQL4, indicators, expert advisors, scripts, DLL files... For those of us interested in programming, it was a whole new world waiting to be explored.

In any case, first and foremost, I wanted to thank you for your comment, as it immediately took me back to that time.

And I agree with you: MetaQuotes has come a very long way since then, with both successful decisions and its fair share of missteps along the way. MT5 is perhaps the best example of this. Many of us initially wondered why we needed it at all, but over time it became clear that it is much more than just a replacement for MT4.

Looking back, it’s amazing how much has changed, whilst retaining much of the platform’s original spirit.

In my opinion, they should have introduced a hedging mode to MT5 straight away, and it would have become the global leader in Forex in the second half of the 2010s. But the CEO’s stance was clear – it was to be the leader in exchange trading. There were endless arguments on the forum about this! And I remembered how, back in December 2012, I was running face-to-face courses at RoboForex, and then they asked me to run a thread on their forum about MQL4 – just as build 600 with OOP was released! Phew, I really went for it back then – the thread was the most popular one.

[Miguel Angel Vico Alba]

Alexey Volchanskiy #:
In my opinion, they should have introduced a hedging mode to MT5 straight away, and it would have become the global leader in Forex in the second half of the 2010s. But the CEO’s stance was clear – it was to be the leader in exchange trading. There were endless arguments on the forum about this! And I remembered how, back in December 2012, I was running face-to-face courses at RoboForex, and then they asked me to run a thread on their forum about MQL4 – just as build 600 with OOP was released! Phew, I really went for it back then – the thread was the most popular one.

Yes, I think the hedging issue is a very good example of how MetaQuotes has sometimes worked over the years.

From a technical point of view, I can understand the original decision. If MT5 was meant to go beyond retail Forex and become a real multi-asset platform, with exchange trading as an important part of it, then the netting model made perfect sense.

The problem is that, by that point, MT4 already had a huge ecosystem around it, with traders and developers relying on independent orders, hedging, Magic Numbers and multiple strategies running on the same symbol. For many Forex users, moving to MT5 initially felt less like gaining something and more like giving up part of the flexibility they already had.

So, in my opinion, MetaQuotes was right about the direction, but probably too rigid about the transition. Supporting both netting and hedging from the beginning would have made the move from MT4 much easier. If I remember correctly, they finally added hedging in 2016, and even explained at the time that MT5 had originally been designed around the netting model and that hedging was being added with Forex traders in mind: https://www.mql5.com/en/articles/2299

On a much smaller scale, the dark mode story reminds me a little of the same thing. We asked for it publicly for years, and internally we also kept mentioning whenever we had the chance that it would be a good addition. The competition already had it, yes, but it was not only about keeping up with other platforms. Those of us who spend most of the day in front of the terminal were really feeling it in our eyes. 😋

It took a long time, but eventually it came.

That is something I have seen more than once with MetaQuotes. They can be very stubborn about certain decisions, even when users have been asking for something for years. Sometimes that stubbornness is frustrating.

But I also think it is fair to say that the same stubbornness has another side. They have always had a very clear idea of where they wanted to take the platform, and without that persistence we probably would not have the MT5 we have today: a true multi-asset platform, a much more capable language, the Strategy Tester and distributed agents, OpenCL, Python integration, the mathematical libraries and everything that came later.

So yes, there have been mistakes, and sometimes things that should probably have arrived much earlier. But there has also been a long-term vision behind many of those decisions.

And sorry if I have gone on a bit. Those who know me already know that sooner or later I always end up in "crocodile mode"... Sergey❤️😋

[Vitaliy Kuznetsov]

The boom in forex and the information business coincided more or less.

And in 2016, the trend began to gain momentum. Everyone knew about MT5, but a huge number of programmes had already been written for MT4. So, the focus was actively on areas where there was already a wealth of experience.

However, a sharp shift could occur thanks to AI and free MT4-to-MT5 conversion.

That is, if a feature allowing the transfer of MT4 code to MT5 for free at the click of a button were to be advertised, along with some statistics.

For example, “We selected 100 examples of indicators from the codebase: graphical, oscillators, trend-following, those with arrows, dashboards and multi-currency indicators. And 100 examples of expert advisors. In 80–90 per cent of cases, the code was converted with a single click and required no further adjustments.” That would send an incredibly strong signal. The key is simplicity (one click) and the success rate. In future, this benchmark could be upgraded. I reckon that in future versions of the AI, the successful porting rate will reach 99 per cent. This will mark a complete victory for MT5 over MT4, but what will happen to the industry as a whole is another matter entirely.