Karen Gillan Net Worth 2026
Last updated July 15, 2026
As of 2026, Karen Gillan has an estimated net worth of $166.2 Million, computed film by film and year by year from public records and published rates. Every input, rate, and source behind the number is on this page.
Calculation
- Disclosed salaries and documented backend, each with a citation
- Undisclosed roles modeled from disclosed comparables for their era, budget band, and career stage
- Backend, endorsements, and producing credits estimated from disclosed medians
Fast Facts
| Birthdate | November 28, 1987 |
|---|---|
| Birthplace | Inverness |
| Breakthrough | A Touch of Cloth (2014) |
| Best Known | Avengers: Endgame (2019) |
Data
Every line below is computed from public data and the published rate tables on our methodology page. Confidence: Grade C. Documented numbers cover only a small share of this figure, so most of it is modeled from published rates and comparables (grades run from A, mostly documented, to C, mostly modeled).
The Calculation
| Line | Amount |
|---|---|
| Revenue | |
| Film pay, modeled lead roles (36 of 61 films) era and budget-band medians of disclosed lead salaries | $316,190,656 |
| Film pay, modeled supporting and early roles (25 of 61 films) 2.5% of era medians: the pre-stardom rate | $12,875,000 |
| Backend points, estimated 12% of disclosed lead deals included points, at a median 2.6% of box office; applied as an expected value to 18 undisclosed lead roles | $31,165,306 |
| Endorsements, estimated (1 documented brand partnerships) 1 named partnerships x the $5.5M median disclosed ambassador fee x the 2.1-year median disclosed term | $11,550,000 |
| Residuals, estimated SAG residual rates (3.6% of distributor receipts in the post-theatrical windows) on receipts assumed at half of box office, split by role share and spread over the ten years after each release | $61,457,135 |
| Investment returns on savings actual 60/40 portfolio returns each year, after tax | $58,116,235 |
| Expenses | |
| Representation fees agent 10% + attorney 5% | -$62,406,327 |
| Taxes UK effective rates, year by year | -$141,454,341 |
| Personal spending measured household savings rates by income | -$104,147,440 |
| Estimated net worth | $166,150,306 |
Film by Film
| Film | Year | Role | Budget | Box office | Pay counted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Highlander no disclosed fee: modeled on the $20.0M era median, capped at 15% of budget | 2026 | Lead | $19,000,000 | $12,900,000 | $2,850,000 |
| Jumanji: Open World no disclosed fee: modeled on the $25.0M median for its era and budget band, capped at 15% of budget | 2026 | Lead | $70,000,000 | – | $10,500,000 |
| Douglas Is Cancelled no disclosed fee: modeled on the $25.0M median for its era and budget band, capped at 15% of budget | 2024 | Lead | $70,000,000 | – | $10,500,000 |
| Sleeping Dogs no disclosed fee: modeled on the $20.0M era median, capped at 15% of budget | 2024 | Lead | $2,100,000 | $2,100,000 | $315,000 |
| The Life of Chuck no disclosed fee: modeled on the $25.0M median for its era and budget band, capped at 15% of budget | 2024 | Lead | $70,000,000 | – | $10,500,000 |
| Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3 no disclosed fee: modeled on the $15.0M median for its era and budget band | 2023 | Lead | $250,000,000 | $845,555,777 | $15,000,000 |
| Late Bloomers no disclosed fee: modeled on the $25.0M median for its era and budget band, capped at 15% of budget | 2023 | Lead | $70,000,000 | – | $10,500,000 |
| The Simpsons no disclosed fee: 2.5% of the $25.0M median for its era and budget band | 2023 | Supporting | $75,000,000 | $536,400,000 | $625,000 |
| Dual no disclosed fee: modeled on the $20.0M era median, capped at 15% of budget | 2022 | Lead | $4,500,000 | $425,909 | $675,000 |
| Next Exit no disclosed fee: modeled on the $25.0M median for its era and budget band, capped at 15% of budget | 2022 | Lead | $70,000,000 | – | $10,500,000 |
| The Bubble no disclosed fee: modeled on the $25.0M median for its era and budget band, capped at 15% of budget | 2022 | Lead | $70,000,000 | – | $10,500,000 |
| Thor: Love and Thunder no disclosed fee: modeled on the $15.0M median for its era and budget band | 2022 | Lead | $250,000,000 | $760,928,081 | $15,000,000 |
| Calls no disclosed fee: 2.5% of the $25.0M median for its era and budget band | 2021 | Supporting | $70,000,000 | – | $625,000 |
| Gunpowder Milkshake no disclosed fee: modeled on the $25.0M median for its era and budget band, capped at 15% of budget | 2021 | Lead | $30,000,000 | $1,000,000 | $4,500,000 |
| Cake no disclosed fee: 2.5% of the $25.0M median for its era and budget band | 2020 | Supporting | $70,000,000 | – | $625,000 |
| The Call of the Wild no disclosed fee: modeled on the $15.0M median for its era and budget band | 2020 | Lead | $150,000,000 | $107,604,626 | $15,000,000 |
| Avengers: Endgame no disclosed fee: modeled on the $20.0M median for its era and budget band | 2019 | Lead | $356,000,000 | $2,797,501,328 | $20,000,000 |
| Jumanji: The Next Level no disclosed fee: modeled on the $20.0M median for its era and budget band, capped at 15% of budget | 2019 | Lead | $125,000,000 | $800,059,707 | $18,750,000 |
| Neurotica no disclosed fee: modeled on the $20.0M median for its era and budget band, capped at 15% of budget | 2019 | Lead | $40,000,000 | – | $6,000,000 |
| Spies in Disguise no disclosed fee: 2.5% of the $20.0M median for its era and budget band | 2019 | Supporting | $100,000,000 | $171,600,000 | $500,000 |
| Stuber no disclosed fee: modeled on the $20.0M era median, capped at 15% of budget | 2019 | Lead | $18,000,000 | $32,299,999 | $2,700,000 |
| The Hoarding no disclosed fee: modeled on the $20.0M median for its era and budget band, capped at 15% of budget | 2019 | Lead | $40,000,000 | – | $6,000,000 |
| All Creatures Here Below no disclosed fee: modeled on the $20.0M median for its era and budget band, capped at 15% of budget | 2018 | Lead | $40,000,000 | – | $6,000,000 |
| Avengers: Infinity War no disclosed fee: modeled on the $20.0M median for its era and budget band | 2018 | Lead | $400,000,000 | $2,048,359,754 | $20,000,000 |
| The Party's Just Beginning no disclosed fee: modeled on the $20.0M era median, capped at 15% of budget | 2018 | Lead | $4,371 | $4,371 | $656 |
| Alex & the List no disclosed fee: modeled on the $20.0M median for its era and budget band, capped at 15% of budget | 2017 | Lead | $40,000,000 | – | $6,000,000 |
| Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 no disclosed fee: modeled on the $20.0M median for its era and budget band | 2017 | Lead | $200,000,000 | $863,756,051 | $20,000,000 |
| Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle no disclosed fee: modeled on the $20.0M median for its era and budget band, capped at 15% of budget | 2017 | Lead | $90,000,000 | $962,102,237 | $13,500,000 |
| The Circle no disclosed fee: modeled on the $20.0M era median, capped at 15% of budget | 2017 | Lead | $18,000,000 | $33,900,000 | $2,700,000 |
| Emo Dad no disclosed fee: 2.5% of the $20.0M median for its era and budget band | 2016 | Supporting | $40,000,000 | – | $500,000 |
| In a Valley of Violence no disclosed fee: modeled on the $20.0M median for its era and budget band, capped at 15% of budget | 2016 | Lead | $40,000,000 | $61,797 | $6,000,000 |
| 7 Days in Hell no disclosed fee: modeled on the $20.0M median for its era and budget band, capped at 15% of budget | 2015 | Lead | $40,000,000 | – | $6,000,000 |
| Comedy Bang! Bang! no disclosed fee: 2.5% of the $20.0M median for its era and budget band | 2015 | Supporting | $40,000,000 | – | $500,000 |
| Coward no disclosed fee: modeled on the $20.0M median for its era and budget band, capped at 15% of budget | 2015 | Lead | $40,000,000 | – | $6,000,000 |
| Fun Size Horror: Volume Two no disclosed fee: modeled on the $20.0M median for its era and budget band, capped at 15% of budget | 2015 | Lead | $40,000,000 | – | $6,000,000 |
| Robot Chicken no disclosed fee: 2.5% of the $20.0M median for its era and budget band | 2015 | Supporting | $40,000,000 | – | $500,000 |
| The Big Short no disclosed fee: modeled on the $20.0M median for its era and budget band, capped at 15% of budget | 2015 | Lead | $28,000,000 | $133,346,506 | $4,200,000 |
| Warning Labels no disclosed fee: modeled on the $20.0M median for its era and budget band, capped at 15% of budget | 2015 | Lead | $40,000,000 | – | $6,000,000 |
| A Touch of Cloth no disclosed fee: modeled on the $20.0M median for its era and budget band, capped at 15% of budget | 2014 | Lead | $40,000,000 | – | $6,000,000 |
| Bound for Greatness no disclosed fee: modeled on the $20.0M median for its era and budget band, capped at 15% of budget | 2014 | Lead | $40,000,000 | – | $6,000,000 |
| Guardians of the Galaxy no disclosed fee: modeled on the $20.0M median for its era and budget band | 2014 | Lead | $170,000,000 | $772,776,600 | $20,000,000 |
| Happy Idiot no disclosed fee: modeled on the $20.0M median for its era and budget band, capped at 15% of budget | 2014 | Lead | $40,000,000 | – | $6,000,000 |
| Selfie no disclosed fee: modeled on the $20.0M median for its era and budget band, capped at 15% of budget | 2014 | Lead | $40,000,000 | – | $6,000,000 |
| American Airlines Theatre no disclosed fee: 2.5% of the $20.0M median for its era and budget band | 2013 | Lead | $40,000,000 | – | $500,000 |
| NTSF:SD:SUV:: no disclosed fee: 2.5% of the $20.0M median for its era and budget band | 2013 | Lead | $40,000,000 | – | $500,000 |
| Not Another Happy Ending no disclosed fee: 2.5% of the $20.0M median for its era and budget band | 2013 | Lead | $40,000,000 | – | $500,000 |
| Oculus no disclosed fee: 2.5% of the $20.0M median for its era and budget band | 2013 | Lead | $40,000,000 | – | $500,000 |
| In Love With... no disclosed fee: 2.5% of the $20.0M median for its era and budget band | 2012 | Lead | $40,000,000 | – | $500,000 |
| Inadmissible Evidence no disclosed fee: 2.5% of the $20.0M median for its era and budget band | 2011 | Lead | $40,000,000 | – | $500,000 |
| Doctor Who Prom (2010) no disclosed fee: 2.5% of the $20.0M median for its era and budget band | 2010 | Supporting | $40,000,000 | – | $500,000 |
| Doctor Who: Evacuation Earth no disclosed fee: 2.5% of the $20.0M median for its era and budget band | 2010 | Lead | $40,000,000 | – | $500,000 |
| Doctor Who: Return to Earth no disclosed fee: 2.5% of the $20.0M median for its era and budget band | 2010 | Lead | $40,000,000 | – | $500,000 |
| Outcast no disclosed fee: 2.5% of the $20.0M median for its era and budget band | 2010 | Lead | $40,000,000 | – | $500,000 |
| Doctor Who no disclosed fee: 2.5% of the $20.0M median for its era and budget band | 2009 | Lead | $40,000,000 | – | $500,000 |
| The Well no disclosed fee: 2.5% of the $20.0M median for its era and budget band | 2009 | Lead | $40,000,000 | – | $500,000 |
| Coming Up no disclosed fee: 2.5% of the $20.0M median for its era and budget band | 2008 | Lead | $40,000,000 | – | $500,000 |
| Doctor Who no disclosed fee: 2.5% of the $20.0M median for its era and budget band | 2008 | Lead | $40,000,000 | – | $500,000 |
| Harley Street no disclosed fee: 2.5% of the $20.0M median for its era and budget band | 2008 | Lead | $40,000,000 | – | $500,000 |
| Stacked no disclosed fee: 2.5% of the $20.0M median for its era and budget band | 2008 | Lead | $40,000,000 | – | $500,000 |
| The Kevin Bishop Show no disclosed fee: 2.5% of the $20.0M median for its era and budget band | 2008 | Lead | $40,000,000 | – | $500,000 |
| Rebus no disclosed fee: 2.5% of the $20.0M median for its era and budget band | 2006 | Lead | $40,000,000 | – | $500,000 |
How the modeled figures work. An undisclosed lead role after the breakthrough gets the median of disclosed lead salaries for its era and budget band, capped at 15% of the film’s budget. Supporting and pre-breakthrough roles get 2.5% of that median, the documented going rate for actors before stardom. Films with no reported budget are treated as small productions. Undocumented backend, endorsements, and producer or director credits enter as separate estimated lines in the calculation above, built from disclosed medians. Every median comes from the published tables on our methodology page.
Net Worth Over Time
Modeled balance at the end of each year, matching the year-by-year table below.
Year by Year
| Year | Income | Rep fees | Tax rate | Spent | Saved | Balance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026 | $18,989,327 | $2,848,399 | 40% | $4,745,433 | $4,939,124 | $166,150,306 |
| 2025 | $9,529,022 | $1,429,353 | 40% | $2,381,303 | $2,478,499 | $161,211,182 |
| 2024 | $31,308,236 | $4,696,235 | 40% | $7,823,928 | $8,143,272 | $143,803,572 |
| 2023 | $38,122,260 | $5,718,339 | 40% | $9,526,753 | $9,915,600 | $121,355,409 |
| 2022 | $44,112,104 | $6,616,816 | 40% | $11,023,615 | $11,473,558 | $98,035,943 |
| 2021 | $10,232,527 | $1,534,879 | 40% | $2,557,108 | $2,661,480 | $103,136,405 |
| 2020 | $20,995,142 | $3,149,271 | 40% | $5,246,686 | $5,460,836 | $89,213,029 |
| 2019 | $67,928,053 | $10,189,208 | 40% | $16,975,220 | $17,668,087 | $75,677,139 |
| 2018 | $33,917,816 | $5,087,672 | 40% | $8,476,062 | $8,822,024 | $49,576,658 |
| 2017 | $48,434,760 | $7,265,214 | 40% | $12,103,846 | $12,597,881 | $41,851,134 |
| 2016 | $7,038,426 | $1,055,764 | 40% | $1,758,903 | $1,830,695 | $26,347,730 |
| 2015 | $30,067,473 | $4,510,121 | 40% | $7,513,861 | $7,820,550 | $23,072,165 |
| 2014 | $46,367,034 | $6,955,055 | 40% | $11,587,122 | $12,060,066 | $15,130,870 |
| 2013 | $2,000,000 | $300,000 | 40% | $499,800 | $520,200 | $2,841,864 |
| 2012 | $500,000 | $75,000 | 40% | $160,650 | $94,350 | $2,033,715 |
| 2011 | $500,000 | $75,000 | 40% | $160,650 | $94,350 | $1,786,234 |
| 2010 | $2,000,000 | $300,000 | 40% | $499,800 | $520,200 | $1,637,139 |
| 2009 | $1,000,000 | $150,000 | 40% | $321,300 | $188,700 | $1,026,089 |
| 2008 | $2,500,000 | $375,000 | 40% | $624,750 | $650,250 | $728,386 |
| 2007 | $0 | $0 | 40% | $0 | $0 | $97,792 |
| 2006 | $500,000 | $75,000 | 40% | $160,650 | $94,350 | $94,350 |
Model Notes
- RESIDENCE PROXY: residence not individually sourced for this batch; US-CA default applied until documented
Methodology
We rebuild Karen’s career as a yearly time series. Disclosed salaries and documented backend enter as reported, with citations. Undisclosed lead roles get the median of disclosed salaries for their era and budget band, capped at 15% of the film’s budget. Supporting roles and roles from before the breakthrough get 2.5% of that median, the going-rate ratio measured from disclosed pre-stardom deals. Films with no reported budget are treated as small productions, and every role is estimated unless a source documents it was unpaid. Representation fees come out at sourced rates, taxes follow the eras actually lived through, spending follows measured household savings behavior unless court documents say otherwise, and what remains compounds at real market returns. Undocumented backend enters as an expected value from disclosed deals, endorsements at the median disclosed ambassador fee, and producer or director credits at union-scale floors.
The full model, every rate table, and how our estimates have checked out against real deals are on the methodology page.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is Karen Gillan's net worth in 2026?
As of 2026, Karen Gillan's net worth is an estimated $166.2 Million. The estimate is built film by film from disclosed salaries and documented backend, then year by year: income, minus representation fees and taxes, minus spending, compounded at real market returns.
How does Karen Gillan make money?
Film salaries and documented backend participation.
How is Karen Gillan's net worth calculated?
Disclosed paydays enter as reported, with citations. Undisclosed lead roles use the median of disclosed salaries for their era and budget band, capped at 15% of the film's budget, and supporting or early-career roles use the documented pre-stardom fraction of that median. We subtract sourced representation fees, taxes for the years Karen actually worked, and spending from measured savings behavior, then compound at real market returns. Undocumented backend, endorsements, and producing credits enter as estimated lines from disclosed medians. Every rate and source is published.
How much does Karen Gillan make per film?
It varies by role and era, and the film-by-film table above lists the pay counted for every title. Disclosed paydays enter as reported. Undisclosed roles are modeled from what comparable actors earned in the same era and budget range, with lead roles after the breakthrough earning the most and supporting or early roles a documented fraction of that.
Why is the tax rate so high, and don't actors avoid it with a loan-out company?
Tax comes out at the effective rate for where Karen lived each year, which is the rate shown in the year-by-year table. In a high-tax state like California, combined federal and state income tax reaches close to half of a top earner's income, so those years run in the mid-40s percent. A loan-out company, the corporation many actors run their income through, does not lower the tax on the money they take home. Its real advantage is deducting business costs such as agent, manager, and attorney fees, and the model already subtracts those as a separate line before any tax is applied. High-earning performers also fall outside the pass-through business deduction that other company owners can claim, so it buys them no rate cut.
Why is this figure different from other net worth sites?
Most sites publish a single number with no way to check it. This estimate is built in the open: every salary, rate, and assumption is on the page, and the methodology page lists every source.
How accurate is this estimate?
No net worth estimate for a private individual is exact; this one is a model built from public data. The difference is that you can see how it was built and check every step. The confidence grade near the top of the calculation shows how much of the figure rests on disclosed numbers, and the page flags where a number leans on an assumption.
Is Karen Gillan rich compared to the average person?
Yes. A net worth of $166.2 Million is far above the median American household, which sits near $193,000 according to Federal Reserve data.
Explore Other Actors
About NetWorth Explained
We originally created NWE because nobody in the public-figure net worth space showed their work. Magazines and sites threw out big numbers while hiding behind vague claims of “proprietary algorithms” or “insider knowledge.” That’s why we started the world’s only publication that transparently showed every assumption, every variable, and every calculation. We’re still the only ones who do it this way. Read more about NetWorth Explained.