What AEMP 2.0 Actually Means When Your Fleet Runs Three Different Brands

If your fleet is a Hyundai excavator, a New Holland skid steer, and a CAT dozer parked on the same site, you already know the annoying part of modern telematics: three different dealer logins, three different apps, and three different ways of reporting the same basic thing — how many hours a machine ran and how much fuel it burned. There's a standard built specifically to fix that mismatch. It's called AEMP 2.0, and most contractors running mixed-brand fleets have never heard of it, even though at least one of their machines is probably already speaking it.

What AEMP 2.0 Actually Standardizes

AEMP 2.0 is a telematics data standard stewarded by the Association of Equipment Manufacturers, built specifically so fleet managers running equipment from multiple brands can pull the same core data points out of every machine's telematics feed, regardless of which manufacturer built it. The first public version shipped in 2010, a major revision followed in 2016, and the standard was eventually formalized internationally as ISO 15143-3:2020, covering earthmoving and mobile road construction machinery specifically. That international formalization matters: it means the standard isn't a marketing term one manufacturer invented, it's a documented data schema that any telematics provider can implement and be measured against.

The core data set is deliberately simple: machine location (latitude, longitude, and timestamp), cumulative operating hours, total lifetime fuel consumed, fuel used in the last 24 hours, and total distance traveled. An optional extended KPI set goes further, covering idle time (both engine-on idle and key-on engine-off idle), fuel remaining and DEF remaining ratios, basic engine condition flags, PTO hours, average engine load factor, and payload totals on machines that track them. Put plainly: AEMP 2.0 is what lets a fuel-burn or utilization report mean the same thing whether it's pulled from a CAT machine or a Hyundai one.

New Holland's FleetForce Already Spoke This Language. Does the Replacement?

Here's a concrete example most New Holland owners have already run into: FleetForce, the telematics platform New Holland Construction ran for years, explicitly built in AEMP 2.0 compliance for mixed fleets as a named feature, alongside real-time geofence alerts, maintenance alerts for conditions like an overdue oil change or an out-of-range engine temperature, utilization reports for bidding and estimating, and a fuel-level dashboard widget. It was available factory-fit or as an aftermarket kit, with subscription terms running one to five years.

In October 2025, New Holland Construction retired FleetForce in favor of myNewHollandConstruction, described in the company's own announcement as the platform for "the next generation of telematics" with a renewed design and friendlier dashboard navigation. What the public announcement doesn't spell out is whether myNewHollandConstruction carries forward FleetForce's explicit AEMP 2.0 compliance, or whether that mixed-fleet standard support needs to be reconfirmed under the new platform. If your fleet planning depends on pulling standardized data across brands, that's a direct question worth putting to your New Holland dealer before you assume continuity between the two platforms rather than after you've already built a reporting process around it.

Why This Actually Matters on a Mixed-Brand Jobsite

New Holland isn't the only approved manufacturer building toward this standard. Komatsu's My Komatsu platform is positioned specifically around delivering usable data for mixed fleets, and CASE Construction Equipment aligned its SiteWatch platform with AEMP 2.0/ISO 15143-3 back in 2018, specifically so fleet managers weren't stuck reconciling incompatible reports machine by machine. Third-party fleet software and telematics marketplaces have built connectors around the same standard precisely because contractors don't buy one brand for life; they buy whatever fits the job and the budget, and then have to manage all of it together.

In practice, AEMP 2.0 compliance is what lets a contractor running a Hyundai dozer, a New Holland skid steer, and a CAT excavator pull a single utilization report across all three without manually re-entering hours and fuel data from three separate portals into a spreadsheet every week. For a growing fleet, that's the difference between a fleet manager who can actually see which machines are underused and which are overworked, and one who's guessing from memory.

What the Standard Doesn't Cover

AEMP 2.0 is useful precisely because its core data set is narrow and deliberately basic. It doesn't standardize deep diagnostic data like specific fault codes, detailed hydraulic system health, or granular payload-by-cycle data on a loader — that level of detail generally still requires each manufacturer's own proprietary API or dealer-level diagnostic tools. CAT's Product Link hardware tiers, for example, go considerably deeper than the AEMP core set on CAT equipment specifically. So AEMP 2.0 solves the "can I compare basic utilization across brands" problem, but it doesn't replace brand-specific telematics entirely if your fleet management actually needs deep diagnostic visibility into a single manufacturer's machines. Most fleet managers end up running both: AEMP-standardized reporting for cross-brand utilization, and brand-specific portals for anything deeper.

That split matters most at renewal time. If a dealer tries to upsell a full proprietary fleet-management suite as the only way to get mixed-fleet visibility, it's worth asking specifically whether AEMP 2.0 compliance alone would cover what you actually need, before paying for deeper, brand-specific functionality you may not use.

Who This Actually Helps Most

Standardized cross-brand reporting isn't an abstract IT concern. It shows a real, practical payoff for specific kinds of operations:

• General contractors and site-development firms running a mixed fleet across several jobsites at once, where comparing utilization between a CAT dozer on one site and a Hyundai dozer on another used to mean two separate login sessions and manual spreadsheet work.

• Excavation and grading subcontractors deciding whether to add another machine to the fleet or reallocate an existing one, a decision that depends on seeing real utilization data across every brand they run, not just the newest one.

• Demolition and land-clearing contractors billing by the hour or by production volume, where consistent fuel and hour data across brands supports more defensible job-costing and billing.

• Equipment-heavy subcontractors managing fuel budgets across a mixed fleet, where a standardized 24-hour fuel-use field makes it possible to spot an anomalous burn rate on any machine, regardless of brand, without learning four separate reporting interfaces.

Getting Started Without Overbuilding It

You don't need a full fleet-management software overhaul to take advantage of AEMP 2.0 compliance. Start by asking each manufacturer's dealer directly whether the specific telematics platform your machine runs today is AEMP 2.0/ISO 15143-3 compliant, since that's not always obvious from marketing material alone, as the gap between FleetForce's explicit compliance claim and myNewHollandConstruction's vague "next generation" framing shows. If multiple machines in your fleet are compliant, even a simple shared spreadsheet pulling the core fields — hours, fuel, location, distance — from each brand's portal gets you most of the benefit without a new software purchase. Only move to a dedicated multi-brand fleet platform once you've confirmed the underlying data is actually standardized across the specific machines you own.

Who Actually Controls This Data on a Rented Machine

There's a financing angle here that doesn't get talked about enough: telematics data access, standardized or not, generally belongs to whoever owns or finances the machine, not whoever's renting it for a job. A rental company's fleet telematics serves the rental company's fleet management, not yours, and you typically have no real visibility into a rented machine's AEMP feed even if it's technically compliant. Financing or owning the equipment outright means you control that data stream and decide how it feeds into your own fleet reporting. For a deeper look at who legally owns telematics data on financed equipment and why it matters for your insurance coverage, see our breakdown of who actually owns your telematics data. And if you're trying to understand what a specific OEM's telematics hardware tier actually tracks beyond the AEMP basics, our explainer on CAT Product Link hardware tiers breaks down what PL161, Product Link Elite, and satellite hardware each report.

The Bottom Line for a Mixed Fleet

AEMP 2.0 won't give you deep diagnostics on any single machine, but it does mean the basic utilization, fuel, and hour data across a mixed Hyundai, New Holland, CAT, and Komatsu fleet can live in one comparable report instead of three or four incompatible ones. Before you build a fleet-wide reporting process around it, confirm with each manufacturer's dealer that the specific platform you're on — especially a recently replaced one like New Holland's myNewHollandConstruction — still carries the compliance forward. For financing options on the equipment that generates this data in the first place, visit our construction equipment financing hub.

Finance the Fleet, Own the Data

BFC finances and leases construction equipment across every brand in your fleet, nationwide, any credit profile, startups included, so the telematics data your machines generate works for you instead of a rental company. Visit our home page to see how we work, apply for equipment financing to get started, browse our equipment for sale and financing marketplace, or subscribe to the BFC blog for more fleet management and equipment coverage like this.