Keep the two platform inventories explicit
MetaQuotes distinguishes MT5’s distributed architecture from MT4’s single-server architecture in its broker comparison. This is a starting point for a design discussion, not an instruction to deploy a fixed number of hosts.
Record the actual software version, available roles, administrator rights, client access paths and connected systems for each environment. Existing plugins, reporting tools and account workflows may introduce dependencies that a high-level architecture comparison does not show.
Document the roles rather than counting machines
| Record | Reason it matters |
|---|---|
| Platform role and version | Establish the software boundary being designed |
| Host and region | Locate runtime and network dependencies |
| Access owner | Identify who can configure and recover the service |
| External interfaces | Expose adapters, reporting and CRM dependencies |
| Recovery relationship | Show what is restored together and what remains external |
If both platforms operate, label their accounts, configuration and records clearly. Sharing a business system does not make the platform-side data or interface behaviour identical.
Review a parallel-platform change
Illustrative scenario: a brokerage retains MT4 while introducing an MT5 environment. The review identifies separate platform operations, shared CRM actions and the records needed to reconcile account provisioning and reporting.
The resulting map should show which services can be maintained independently and where a shared dependency could affect both environments. Confirm all deployment rights and provider boundaries before implementation. Use the platform-specific service pages to scope the desired result, then validate it against representative user and operating workflows.