Most celebrity wealth is estimated. The Harry Potter trio is different, because British actors run their careers through UK limited companies, and UK companies file public accounts. Daniel Radcliffe's family company reported £102 million in net assets for the end of 2024. Rupert Grint's residual income surfaced, line by line, in a tax tribunal. Emma Watson has a complete published model on this site. That is three different kinds of evidence pointing at the same franchise.
Want to see how film earnings become net worth? Try the Celebrity Net Worth Calculator, the same fees-taxes-spending-returns skeleton behind these figures.
Harry Potter cast net worth at a glance (2026)
| Actor | Figure | Evidence |
|---|---|---|
| Daniel Radcliffe | ~$130M ($110–150M) | Company accounts: £102M net assets, end of 2024 |
| Emma Watson | $79.4M (full profile) | Complete year-by-year published model |
| Rupert Grint | ~$66M ($55–80M) | Reported fees + residuals documented in his HMRC case |
Radcliffe's figure leads with the documented filing; Watson's is our full engine; Grint's is our roundup model over reported income. Full profiles for Radcliffe and Grint are in the works.
Daniel Radcliffe: the fortune with a paper trail
Radcliffe's parents set up Gilmore Jacobs Ltd in 2000, when their eleven-year-old landed the part, and the company has channeled his earnings and investments ever since. Its accounts show net assets climbing from £96.3 million in early 2024 to £102 million by year end, about $130 million, driven by property and investment gains fourteen years after the final film. His franchise earnings are reported at roughly £75 million across the eight films, which means the investment engine has now earned him more than the boy wizard did.
Our own model of his reported income compounds to about $105 million, below the filed figure, and when a documented number beats a modeled one, the document wins. That is the same rule our full engine applies everywhere: filings first, models where filings run out.
Emma Watson: $79.4 million, fully published
Watson is the one member of the trio with a complete model on this site: reported Harry Potter fees rising to $15 million per Deathly Hallows film, Beauty and the Beast, endorsement contracts for Lancôme and Burberry, her UK production company's filings, and Kering board work, with fees, UK and US taxes, and measured spending subtracted year by year since 2001. The result lands at $79.4 million for 2026, and every line of it is on her profile page. She has worked selectively since 2019, so compounding on the Potter-era base does most of the recent growth.
Rupert Grint: the residuals a court made public
Grint's reported fees reached $30 million for the two Deathly Hallows films, roughly $60 to 70 million across the franchise. What makes his case unusual is the paper trail his tax dispute created: the HMRC tribunal that ended in 2024 (a £1.8 million assessment he lost) put his residual income at roughly £4.5 million in the year he assigned it to his company, Clay 10. Post-Potter he led Apple TV+'s Servant for four seasons and took M. Night Shyamalan film roles. Our roundup model puts him at $55–80 million, with the residual line, unusually, court-documented.
The supporting cast earned character-actor money
The gap between the trio and everyone else is the widest pay spread in franchise history. Tom Felton, Matthew Lewis, and Bonnie Wright worked on standard escalating child-actor contracts, orders of magnitude below the trio's fees, and their post-Potter incomes have come from steady acting work, conventions, and, in Felton's case, a bestselling 2022 memoir. The adult cast, Gambon, Smith, Rickman, were established stars paid accordingly, and several of those estates now run on exactly the residual mechanics our actor pay guide describes.
Why the trio's money kept growing after 2011
Three forces. Residuals: two decades of reruns, streaming windows, and merchandising keep paying the leads, as Grint's tribunal showed in hard numbers. Compounding: money earned at 20 and invested at market returns doubles twice by 40, which is how Radcliffe's company gained more after the films than during them. And selectivity: all three work steadily but modestly by franchise standards, so the Potter-era base stays invested rather than spent. It is the celebrity version of the pattern in our net worth by age data: the curve bends upward long after the income peak.
Frequently Asked Questions
How much did the Harry Potter cast earn from the films?
Radcliffe's franchise earnings are reported at roughly £75 million ($100 million) across eight films. Grint's reported base reached $30 million for the two Deathly Hallows films, about $60–70 million overall, with Watson's fees in the same territory. Supporting cast members earned standard character-actor deals far below that.
Who is the richest Harry Potter actor?
Daniel Radcliffe. Gilmore Jacobs Ltd, the company that channels his earnings, reported £102 million (about $130 million) in net assets at the end of 2024. A filing, not an estimate.
What is Emma Watson's net worth?
$79.4 million in 2026 per our full published model, built from reported fees, endorsements, and UK filings with fees, taxes, and spending subtracted year by year. The complete calculation is on her profile.
Do the Harry Potter actors still get residuals?
Yes. Grint's tax case put his at roughly £4.5 million in a single assignment to his company Clay 10. Reruns, streaming, and merchandising keep the franchise paying its leads two decades on.