MQL4 → MQL5 (indicators & EAs)
Full rewrite to native MQL5 — not the compatibility shim — with proper trade-object handling, hedging/netting awareness, and identical buffer output where required.
Trading Software Development
MT4 is sunsetting in practice even if not in name, and your best tool might be locked in the wrong language. Conversion is not copy-paste: MQL4 and MQL5 differ in order models, netting vs hedging, indicator buffers, and event handling, and a naive port changes behavior in the places that cost money.
Overview
We convert with a verification protocol: the original and the port run side-by-side on the same historical data, and we prove identical (or deliberately different, with notes) signals, orders, and results. Where your EA reads an indicator via iCustom, we preserve buffer contracts so dependent code keeps working.
Pine Script strategies can be ported to MQL5 or cBot C# — with honest caveats: Pine's built-in data and MT5's feed won't produce identical numbers, so we define the acceptance test in advance instead of arguing about 'close enough' later.
Scope
Concrete deliverables, not a capability list. Every item below is scoped in writing before a fixed quote is issued.
Full rewrite to native MQL5 — not the compatibility shim — with proper trade-object handling, hedging/netting awareness, and identical buffer output where required.
Down-porting for brokers or habits that still live on MT4, with explicit notes on platform limits the logic must respect.
TradingView strategies rebuilt with equivalent logic, documented data-source differences, and side-by-side signal comparison.
Logic re-architected onto cTrader's .NET API — a true rewrite that usually improves structure; we scope the behavior-delta decisions with you.
NinjaTrader builds ported to/from MetaTrader, and portfolio consolidation when you're paying for the same strategy three times.
Example scopes
Anonymized project briefs in the shape real requests arrive — platform, fixed quote, and timeline agreed before work starts.
MQL4 → MQL5 · fixed quote · 2 weeks
Client's trading system spanned one EA and three MT4 indicators with iCustom dependencies. Converted all four preserving exact buffer indices and signal values; side-by-side tester comparison over 4 years showed identical trade timestamps and entries within 0.2% of P&L (MQL5 order-model differences only).
Pine → MQL5 · fixed quote · 10 days
TradingView strategy rebuilt in MQL5 with broker-actual spreads replacing Pine's assumptions. Acceptance test: ≥95% signal agreement on the same dataset, with every divergence documented and explained (session edges and intrabar data gaps, both expected).
MQL5 → C# · fixed quote · 3 weeks
Basket-trading EA re-architected as a C# cBot with async order handling — the client's primary requirement was cTrader's superior partial-fill behavior, which we used to simplify the order state machine.
See it work
What actually changes between platforms, and what we hold identical on purpose so the consuming side keeps working unchanged.
MQL4 — source
// MQL4 — positional arguments, ticket or -1
int ticket = OrderSend(
Symbol(), OP_BUY, lots, Ask, slippage,
Ask - stopPoints * Point,
Ask + takePoints * Point,
"entry", MagicNumber, 0, clrNONE);
if (ticket < 0)
Print("OrderSend failed: ", GetLastError());MQL5 — rebuilt
// MQL5 — request/result structs, explicit retcode
MqlTradeRequest request = {};
MqlTradeResult result = {};
request.action = TRADE_ACTION_DEAL;
request.symbol = _Symbol;
request.volume = lots;
request.type = ORDER_TYPE_BUY;
request.price = SymbolInfoDouble(_Symbol, SYMBOL_ASK);
request.sl = request.price - stopPoints * _Point;
request.tp = request.price + takePoints * _Point;
request.deviation = slippage;
request.magic = MagicNumber;
request.type_filling = ORDER_FILLING_IOC;
if (!OrderSend(request, result)
|| result.retcode != TRADE_RETCODE_DONE)
Print("OrderSend failed: ", result.retcode);MQL4 passes ten positional arguments and returns a ticket. MQL5 fills a request struct, checks a retcode, and must state a filling mode — the account may be hedging.
Pricing guidance
How budgets map to scope on this service. Your exact fixed quote arrives in writing after a scoping conversation — the numbers below are directional ranges, not promises.
| Scope | Typical range (USD) | Delivery |
|---|---|---|
| Single indicator or simple EA port | $300 – $700 | 4–8 working days |
| EA + linked indicators (contract-preserving) | $700 – $1,500 | 1–3 weeks |
| Cross-stack (Pine→MQL5, MQL5→C#) | $900 – $2,500 | 2–4 weeks |
Conversions run $300–$2,500 by size: single indicator ports at the low end, multi-file systems with iCustom contracts and verification suites at the top. Compiled-only source is quoted as a from-behavior rebuild. Fixed quote after we see the code.
FAQ
Related
The MQL4 side: we still build and maintain MT4 when you need it.
MT5 DeveloperThe MQL5 side: native-quality targets for every port.
EA Debugging & FixingBehavior mismatch after a bad port elsewhere? We diagnose those too.
All MQL5 programming servicesThe full service menu.
Delivered by platform conversion engineers. Read about how we work: fixed quotes, milestone demos, source-code ownership, and a 30-day bug-fix window.
Book a 30-minute call and bring the strategy, the broken tool, or the rough idea. You leave with a written fixed quote — price, scope, delivery date — before any work starts.
A 30-minute call, no obligation. You leave with a written fixed quote — scope, price, delivery date.