Technically there is a difference. But there are plenty of real estate agents who are far more ethical than some REALTORS who are members of NAR. IT is not a guarantee of competence, or ethics, unfortunately

Richard Weeks answered properly, but I think this is not where you were going with this question. The real difference in my opinion is a Realtor, abides by the Code of Ethics, whereas a real estate agent need not do so.

We know that supposedly Realtors stick to a higher level of ethics... but I've come across many Reatlors who are anything but ethical, and non-Realtors who are totally ethical.

If you get a license to sell real estate you are a real estate agent.  If you join a local, state and national association you are a REALTOR® and thus are allowed to use the REALTOR® treadmark.

  Hi, Ginger Harper 

    NAR's drivel that, "real estate agents who belong to NAR are ethical; real estate agents who do not belong to NAR are not ethical", is absurd. 

    The only difference I "feel" is when a non-NAR member doesn't have a lockbox key and needs access to my listing, or doesn't have the standard Florida forms to make an offer on my listing, and needs to get them from me.   I am happy to oblige them.

In order to become a REALTOR you must be a "real estate agent" therefore the difference boils down to a membership and dollars. That said there are about 2 million agents and roughly half of those are Realtors. I'm in the other 50% Ginger!   

Yes, big difference from my experience.  They don't have to share their listings.  This happened a few years ago.  A small town a ways away, a local real estate agent who had that market cornered, had a listing.  Some buyers of mine were thinking about moving there.  I called the agent to schedule a showing.  After 5 minutes of him brerating me for being a REALTOR®, he told me that my buyers would have to call him directly because he doesn't share his listings.  Hung up on me.  I was stunned! What just happened?  My broker called him the next day and got the same speech. Oh well, he lost a sale because my buyers did not want to deal with him after that either! 

Another  client of ours moved to town and we sold him a home using a local bank bridge loan while his other house was listed on the market by a local real estate agent.  Other REALTORS® weren't allowed to show and finally after almost two years, the house sells and seller could pay off the bridge. Luckily the local bank allowed the seller to renew the bridge a few times.

Both examples seem pretty unethical in my opinion to both buyers and sellers.

I don't think the public or agents really care. Agents should be ethical whether or not they are a REALTOR, but many aren't.

Yes the Realtor is approximately $500 lighter ......

REALTOR is supposed to mean a member of NAR, with all the accompanying ethics training. I think that association has been lost and the terms are now used interchangeably. I wish we were not forced to join NAR, but not for ethics reasons, just to keep costs down. The ethics part doesn't seem to make any difference.

I agree with Jeff Dowler CRS!

Jeff Dowler CRS has this one.

Ginger Harper I don't think the general public really cares. To them all agents are REALTORS®. Unfortunately, if joining the NAR wasn't required for lockbox access and in some cases the MLS, you would see a lot more real estate agents. Joining a trade association doesn't make an agent more ethical.

REALTORs are members of CREA in our great land.  REALTORs are members of NAR in our next door neighbour.

Absolutely, a REALTOR is a member of NAR!

Most definately.  Also, when using the word Realtor® always use the ® after the word.  A Realtor® belongs to the National Association of Realtors® and belongs to a Board of Realtors®. A real estate agent may or many NOT be a Realtor®.  Hope this helps.

A good agent is all things.....

I also add --- by being a REALTOR, you support the rights of homeowners!

Jeff Dowler CRS scores with his answer.  

Honestly, I don't FEEL there is a difference at all.  The COE is not followed by enough REALTORS.

Not in the eyes of the typical consumer. 

Jeff Dowler nailed it. Nothing more to be said!

 If you want to get into the technicalities, there is. However; most folks  feel the words are synonymous.

Ginger Harper - Yes, there is a difference. NAR members are REALTOR(r) and have to abide by COE and take Ethics course once in 4 years.

The R is more train then just a real estate agent.

I can't really answer this. Due to MLS rules, all of the agents in my area are REALTORS®. So I haven't experienced working with those that aren't a member of NAR. 

No.  None.  I see plenty of "Realtors" who don't know the code of ethics and couldn't care any less about it if they did.  All "Realtor" says to me is a (most likely forced) member of NAR.

One pays dues, the other does not.

And one follows a Code of Ethics.

I have met very few who are not members, and have not notice any difference.

It's supposed to be the code of ethics and experience.  Sometimes there is, sometimes, not so much.

Just because the public doesn't recognize the value of NAR doesn't make it worthwhile.

I would remind those who see no difference that CRS has the same problem with public recognition of its value. And CRS is a subsidiary of NAR.

REALTORS® and practitioners are now split 50/50, down from 2/3 being practitioners before the meltdown. That should tell you something.

REALTOR - club member in good standing, waves the flag, same ole, same ole.

Real estate agent - knows how to sell and acquire real estate without the MLS. That is a BIGGIE!