Cameron Diaz Patrimoine net 2026
Dernière mise à jour August 3, 2026
As of 2026, Cameron Diaz has an estimated net worth of $177.6 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
- Salaires divulgués et backend documenté, chacun avec une citation
- Rôles non divulgués modélisés à partir de comparables divulgués pour leur époque, leur tranche budgétaire et leur étape de carrière
- Backend, avenants et crédits de production estimés à partir des médianes divulguées
Fast Facts
| Birthdate | August 30, 1972 |
|---|---|
| Birthplace | San Diego |
| Breakthrough | The Mask (1994) |
| Best Known | There's Something About Mary (1998) |
Who Is Cameron Diaz?
Cameron Diaz was born August 30, 1972 in San Diego, best known for There's Something About Mary (1998). The earnings behind Cameron's net worth come from film salaries, backend participation, and endorsement deals.
The model tracks Cameron's earning years from 1993 to 2026, with the biggest single year in 2001 at about $28.0 Million of gross income. After representation fees, taxes, and living costs, what stays invested compounds at market returns into an estimated $177.6 Million today.
Data
Chaque ligne ci-dessous est calculée à partir des données publiques et des tableaux de tarifs publiés sur notre page méthodologie. Confiance: Catégorie C. Les chiffres documentés ne couvrent qu’une petite partie de ce chiffre, de sorte que la majeure partie est modélisée à partir de taux publiés et de comparables (les notes vont de A, principalement documentées, à C, principalement modélisées).
The Calculation
| Line | Amount |
|---|---|
| Revenue | |
| Film pay, modeled lead roles (30 of 54 films) era and budget-band medians of disclosed lead salaries (winsorized, thin cells shrunk toward the era median), blended with this actor's disclosed quote history when available; soft breakthrough blend near the career break year | $212,253,672 |
| Film pay, modeled post-breakthrough supporting roles (16 of 54 films) 12.0% of lead cells: lane_benchmarks role/post_breakthrough_supporting_ratio | $25,400,179 |
| Film pay, modeled supporting and early roles (8 of 54 films) 2,5% des médianes de l'époque : le taux de pré-célébrité | $7,425,675 |
| Points back-end, estimés 12% of disclosed lead deals included points, at a median 2.6% of box office; expected value on 27 commercially viable undisclosed lead roles; cash spread over 3 years; 4 film(s) used band-specific box-office/budget multiples as a gross proxy | $13,133,242 |
| Approbations, estimées (2 partenariats de marque) 2 named partnerships x the $4.0M annual fee from the median disclosed film deal x a 4-year term, spread across the deal years | $32,000,000 |
| Résidus, estimés SAG residual rates on post-theatrical receipts assumed at half of box office, split by role share and spread over the ten years after each release; 10 film(s) used band-specific box-office proxies | $35,253,655 |
| TV: Saturday Night Live Herself; stated episode count; variety format tier; priced from tv_episode_rates.csv (en.wikipedia.org) | $90,000 |
| TV: Trippin Herself; stated episode count; network not identified, priced on the broadcast cell; priced from tv_episode_rates.csv (en.wikipedia.org) | $150,000 |
| TV: Shrek the Halls Princess Fiona; one engagement for a television film or special; broadcast network family; priced from tv_episode_rates.csv (en.wikipedia.org) | $75,000 |
| TV: Sesame Street Herself; stated episode count; network not identified, priced on the broadcast cell; priced from tv_episode_rates.csv (en.wikipedia.org) | $45,000 |
| TV: Top Gear Herself; guest default per credited year; network not identified, priced on the broadcast cell; priced from tv_episode_rates.csv (en.wikipedia.org) | $30,000 |
| TV: Scared Shrekless Princess Fiona; one engagement for a television film or special; broadcast network family; priced from tv_episode_rates.csv (en.wikipedia.org) | $75,000 |
| TV: Bad Teacher credited role; stated episode count; broadcast network family; priced from tv_episode_rates.csv (en.wikipedia.org) | $3,250,000 |
| TV: RuPaul's Drag Race All Stars Herself; guest default per credited year; reality format tier; priced from tv_episode_rates.csv (en.wikipedia.org) | $30,000 |
| Retour sur investissement de l'épargne mixed portfolio: 55% actual 60/40 securities returns (taxed) + 45% US long-run home-price rate on the rest | $108,979,390 |
| Expenses | |
| Frais de représentation agent 10% + avocat 5% | -$49,041,953 |
| Taxes Taux effectifs US-CA, année par année | -$124,473,085 |
| Dépenses personnelles measured household savings rates by income, times a 88% entertainment-household factor | -$84,860,041 |
| Valeur nette estimée | $177,550,663 |
Film par film
| Film | Year | Role | Budget | Billetterie | Salaire compté |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Outcome no disclosed fee: modeled on the $23.8M shrunk median for 2020s/large (n=2), capped at $10.5M | 2026 | Lead | $70,000,000 | – | $10,500,000 |
| Back in Action no disclosed fee: modeled on the $23.8M shrunk median for 2020s/large (n=2), capped at $10.5M | 2025 | Lead | $70,000,000 | – | $10,500,000 |
| RuPaul's Drag Race All Stars no disclosed fee: post-breakthrough supporting at 12.0% of the $23.8M shrunk median for 2020s/large (n=2) (lane_benchmarks role/post_breakthrough_supporting_ratio) | 2022 | Supporting | $70,000,000 | – | $2,850,000 |
| Annie no disclosed fee: modeled on the $20.0M shrunk median for 2010s/large (n=8), capped at $10.7M | 2014 | Lead | $71,500,000 | $136,900,000 | $10,724,762 |
| Bad Teacher no disclosed fee: modeled on the $11.0M shrunk median for 2010s/mid (n=3), capped at $3.0M | 2014 | Lead | $20,000,000 | $216,200,000 | $2,999,936 |
| Sex Tape no disclosed fee: modeled on the $11.0M shrunk median for 2010s/mid (n=3), capped at $6.0M | 2014 | Lead | $40,000,000 | $126,300,000 | $5,999,867 |
| The Other Woman no disclosed fee: modeled on the $11.0M shrunk median for 2010s/mid (n=3), capped at $6.0M | 2014 | Lead | $40,000,000 | $196,700,000 | $5,999,867 |
| In a World... no disclosed fee: post-breakthrough supporting at 12.0% of the $5.0M median for its era and nearest band (mid) (lane_benchmarks role/post_breakthrough_supporting_ratio), capped at 15% of budget | 2013 | Supporting | $1,000,000 | $3,100,000 | $149,999 |
| The Counselor no disclosed fee: modeled on the $11.0M shrunk median for 2010s/mid (n=3), capped at $3.8M | 2013 | Lead | $25,000,000 | $71,000,000 | $3,749,842 |
| The Unbelievers no disclosed fee: post-breakthrough supporting at 12.0% of the $11.0M shrunk median for 2010s/mid (n=3) (lane_benchmarks role/post_breakthrough_supporting_ratio) | 2013 | Supporting | $40,000,000 | $14,400 | $1,319,953 |
| A Liar's Autobiography: The Untrue Story of Monty Python's Graham Chapman no disclosed fee: post-breakthrough supporting at 12.0% of the $11.0M shrunk median for 2010s/mid (n=3) (lane_benchmarks role/post_breakthrough_supporting_ratio) | 2012 | Supporting | $40,000,000 | $5,102 | $1,319,908 |
| Gambit no disclosed fee: modeled on the $11.0M shrunk median for 2010s/mid (n=3), capped at $6.0M | 2012 | Lead | $40,000,000 | $10,200,000 | $5,999,494 |
| What to Expect When You're Expecting no disclosed fee: modeled on the $11.0M shrunk median for 2010s/mid (n=3), capped at $5.2M | 2012 | Lead | $35,000,000 | $84,400,000 | $5,249,560 |
| Bad Teacher no disclosed fee: modeled on the $11.0M shrunk median for 2010s/mid (n=3), capped at $3.0M | 2011 | Lead | $20,000,000 | $216,200,000 | $2,999,531 |
| The Green Hornet no disclosed fee: modeled on the $20.0M shrunk median for 2010s/tentpole (n=12), capped at $18.0M | 2011 | Lead | $120,000,000 | $227,800,000 | $17,996,986 |
| Knight and Day no disclosed fee: modeled on the $20.0M shrunk median for 2010s/tentpole (n=12), capped at $17.6M | 2010 | Lead | $117,000,000 | $261,900,000 | $17,544,282 |
| Scared Shrekless no disclosed fee: post-breakthrough supporting at 12.0% of the $11.0M shrunk median for 2010s/mid (n=3) (lane_benchmarks role/post_breakthrough_supporting_ratio) | 2010 | Supporting | $40,000,000 | – | $1,319,650 |
| Shrek Forever After no disclosed fee: post-breakthrough supporting at 12.0% of the $20.0M shrunk median for 2010s/tentpole (n=12) (lane_benchmarks role/post_breakthrough_supporting_ratio) | 2010 | Supporting | $150,000,000 | $756,200,000 | $2,399,363 |
| Top Gear no disclosed fee: post-breakthrough supporting at 12.0% of the $11.0M shrunk median for 2010s/mid (n=3) (lane_benchmarks role/post_breakthrough_supporting_ratio) | 2010 | Supporting | $40,000,000 | – | $1,319,650 |
| My Sister's Keeper no disclosed fee: modeled on the $19.4M shrunk median for 2000s/mid (n=2), capped at $4.5M | 2009 | Lead | $30,000,000 | $92,700,000 | $4,497,378 |
| The Box no disclosed fee: modeled on the $19.4M shrunk median for 2000s/mid (n=2), capped at $4.5M | 2009 | Lead | $30,000,000 | $33,299,999 | $4,497,378 |
| What Happens in Vegas no disclosed fee: modeled on the $19.4M shrunk median for 2000s/mid (n=2), capped at $5.2M | 2008 | Lead | $35,000,000 | $219,375,797 | $5,243,943 |
| Shrek the Halls no disclosed fee: post-breakthrough supporting at 12.0% of the $19.4M shrunk median for 2000s/mid (n=2) (lane_benchmarks role/post_breakthrough_supporting_ratio) | 2007 | Supporting | $40,000,000 | – | $2,320,449 |
| Shrek the Third no disclosed fee: post-breakthrough supporting at 12.0% of the $11.8M shrunk median for 2000s/tentpole (n=9) (lane_benchmarks role/post_breakthrough_supporting_ratio) | 2007 | Supporting | $160,000,000 | $808,300,000 | $1,415,406 |
| The Holiday no disclosed fee: modeled on the $20.0M shrunk median for 2000s/large (n=18), capped at $12.8M | 2006 | Lead | $85,000,000 | $205,100,000 | $12,691,142 |
| In Her Shoes no disclosed fee: modeled on the $19.4M shrunk median for 2000s/mid (n=2), capped at $5.2M | 2005 | Lead | $35,000,000 | $83,600,000 | $5,205,604 |
| Trippin' no disclosed fee: post-breakthrough supporting at 12.0% of the $19.4M shrunk median for 2000s/mid (n=2) (lane_benchmarks role/post_breakthrough_supporting_ratio) | 2005 | Supporting | $40,000,000 | – | $2,307,853 |
| Shrek 2 no disclosed fee: post-breakthrough supporting at 12.0% of the $11.8M shrunk median for 2000s/tentpole (n=9) (lane_benchmarks role/post_breakthrough_supporting_ratio) | 2004 | Supporting | $150,000,000 | $933,800,000 | $1,397,988 |
| Charlie's Angels no disclosed fee: modeled on the $19.4M shrunk median for 2000s/mid (n=2), capped at $6.0M | 2003 | Lead | $40,000,000 | $264,100,000 | $5,810,013 |
| Charlie's Angels: Full Throttle no disclosed fee: modeled on the $11.8M shrunk median for 2000s/tentpole (n=9) | 2003 | Lead | $120,000,000 | $259,200,000 | $11,421,279 |
| Shrek 4-D no disclosed fee: modeled on the $19.4M shrunk median for 2000s/mid (n=2), capped at $6.0M | 2003 | Lead | $40,000,000 | – | $5,810,013 |
| Gangs of New York no disclosed fee: modeled on the $20.0M shrunk median for 2000s/large (n=18), capped at $14.6M | 2002 | Lead | $97,000,000 | $193,772,504 | $13,637,183 |
| Minority Report no disclosed fee: post-breakthrough supporting at 12.0% of the $11.8M shrunk median for 2000s/tentpole (n=9) (lane_benchmarks role/post_breakthrough_supporting_ratio) | 2002 | Supporting | $102,000,000 | $358,400,000 | $1,345,239 |
| Slackers no disclosed fee: post-breakthrough supporting at 12.0% of the $18.8M median for its era and nearest band (mid) (lane_benchmarks role/post_breakthrough_supporting_ratio), capped at 15% of budget | 2002 | Supporting | $14,000,000 | $6,400,000 | $1,994,019 |
| The Sweetest Thing no disclosed fee: modeled on the $19.4M shrunk median for 2000s/mid (n=2), capped at $6.5M | 2002 | Lead | $43,000,000 | $68,700,000 | $6,062,418 |
| Shrek no disclosed fee: post-breakthrough supporting at 12.0% of the $20.0M shrunk median for 2000s/large (n=18) (lane_benchmarks role/post_breakthrough_supporting_ratio) | 2001 | Supporting | $60,000,000 | $494,300,000 | $2,173,514 |
| The Invisible Circus no disclosed fee: modeled on the $19.4M shrunk median for 2000s/mid (n=2), capped at $6.0M | 2001 | Lead | $40,000,000 | $77,578 | $5,342,521 |
| Vanilla Sky no disclosed fee: modeled on the $20.0M shrunk median for 2000s/large (n=18), capped at $10.2M | 2001 | Lead | $68,000,000 | $203,400,000 | $9,043,732 |
| Charlie's Angels soft-breakthrough blend (w=0.79): no disclosed fee: modeled on the $20.0M shrunk median for 2000s/large (n=18), capped at $13.9M vs early terms | 2000 | Lead | $93,000,000 | $264,100,000 | $11,144,215 |
| Things You Can Tell Just by Looking at Her soft-breakthrough blend (w=0.79): no disclosed fee: modeled on the $18.8M median for its era and nearest band (mid), capped at $0.3M vs early terms | 2000 | Lead | $2,000,000 | – | $300,000 |
| Any Given Sunday soft-breakthrough blend (w=0.66): no disclosed fee: modeled on the $14.6M shrunk median for 1990s/large (n=3), capped at $8.2M vs early terms | 1999 | Lead | $55,000,000 | $100,200,000 | $5,575,064 |
| Being John Malkovich soft-breakthrough blend (w=0.66): no disclosed fee: modeled on the $10.0M shrunk median for 1990s/small (n=1), capped at $1.9M vs early terms | 1999 | Lead | $13,000,000 | $23,106,667 | $1,373,286 |
| Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas soft-breakthrough supporting blend (w=0.50) | 1998 | Supporting | $18,500,000 | $13,700,000 | $725,000 |
| There's Something About Mary soft-breakthrough blend (w=0.50): no disclosed fee: modeled on the $14.4M shrunk median for 1990s/mid (n=6), capped at $3.5M vs early terms | 1998 | Lead | $23,000,000 | $369,900,000 | $1,904,688 |
| Very Bad Things soft-breakthrough blend (w=0.50): no disclosed fee: modeled on the $14.4M shrunk median for 1990s/mid (n=6), capped at $4.5M vs early terms | 1998 | Lead | $30,000,000 | $21,000,000 | $2,429,688 |
| Welcome to Hollywood soft-breakthrough supporting blend (w=0.50) | 1998 | Supporting | $26,000,000 | – | $1,042,188 |
| A Life Less Ordinary soft-breakthrough blend (w=0.34): no disclosed fee: modeled on the $10.0M shrunk median for 1990s/small (n=1), capped at $1.8M vs early terms | 1997 | Lead | $12,000,000 | $14,600,000 | $775,828 |
| Keys to Tulsa soft-breakthrough blend (w=0.34): no disclosed fee: modeled on the $14.4M shrunk median for 1990s/mid (n=6), capped at $3.9M vs early terms | 1997 | Lead | $26,000,000 | $57,252 | $1,560,509 |
| My Best Friend's Wedding soft-breakthrough blend (w=0.34): no disclosed fee: modeled on the $14.4M shrunk median for 1990s/mid (n=6), capped at $5.7M vs early terms | 1997 | Lead | $38,000,000 | $299,300,000 | $2,171,148 |
| Feeling Minnesota soft-breakthrough blend (w=0.21): no disclosed fee: modeled on the $14.4M shrunk median for 1990s/mid (n=6), capped at $3.9M vs early terms | 1996 | Lead | $26,000,000 | $3,100,000 | $1,097,980 |
| Head Above Water soft-breakthrough blend (w=0.21): no disclosed fee: modeled on the $14.4M shrunk median for 1990s/mid (n=6), capped at $3.9M vs early terms | 1996 | Lead | $26,000,000 | $32,212 | $1,097,980 |
| She's the One soft-breakthrough blend (w=0.21): no disclosed fee: modeled on the $2.0M median for its era and nearest band (small), capped at $0.5M vs early terms | 1996 | Lead | $3,000,000 | $13,800,000 | $133,443 |
| The Last Supper no disclosed fee: 2.5% of the $2.0M median for its era and nearest band (small) (pre-stardom rate); soft-breakthrough weight 0.12 | 1995 | Lead | $500,000 | $459,749 | $52,980 |
| The Mask no disclosed fee: 2.5% of the $14.4M shrunk median for 1990s/mid (n=6) (pre-stardom rate); soft-breakthrough weight 0.06 | 1994 | Lead | $20,500,000 | $351,800,000 | $535,807 |
Comment fonctionnent les figures modélisées. 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 page méthodologie.
Patrimoine net Over Time
Solde modélisé à la fin de chaque année, correspondant au tableau année par année ci-dessous.
Année par année
| Year | Income | Frais de représentation | Taux d'imposition | Spent | Saved | Balance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026 | $7,763,917 | $1,164,587 | 45% | $2,000,653 | $1,628,978 | $177,550,663 |
| 2025 | $10,673,458 | $1,601,019 | 45% | $2,750,401 | $2,239,441 | $172,429,978 |
| 2024 | $3,573,044 | $535,957 | 45% | $920,723 | $749,675 | $158,635,378 |
| 2023 | $465,666 | $69,850 | 45% | $171,721 | $45,978 | $146,195,407 |
| 2022 | $2,525,419 | $378,813 | 45% | $650,765 | $529,868 | $134,142,162 |
| 2021 | $1,619,155 | $242,873 | 45% | $417,234 | $339,721 | $143,381,599 |
| 2020 | $1,048,742 | $157,311 | 45% | $330,649 | $159,637 | $131,933,293 |
| 2019 | $1,123,586 | $168,538 | 45% | $354,246 | $171,030 | $122,659,559 |
| 2018 | $1,253,895 | $188,084 | 45% | $395,331 | $190,865 | $110,707,782 |
| 2017 | $1,380,353 | $207,053 | 47% | $342,763 | $279,086 | $109,875,245 |
| 2016 | $2,192,486 | $328,873 | 47% | $544,428 | $443,286 | $101,844,424 |
| 2015 | $2,324,699 | $348,705 | 47% | $577,259 | $470,018 | $96,391,296 |
| 2014 | $23,404,438 | $3,510,666 | 47% | $5,811,687 | $4,732,012 | $93,646,374 |
| 2013 | $13,591,271 | $2,038,691 | 47% | $3,374,925 | $2,747,943 | $83,797,676 |
| 2012 | $12,931,454 | $1,939,718 | 43% | $3,453,428 | $2,811,862 | $74,223,032 |
| 2011 | $21,006,277 | $3,150,941 | 43% | $5,609,861 | $4,567,680 | $66,940,860 |
| 2010 | $24,394,209 | $3,659,131 | 43% | $6,514,630 | $5,304,365 | $60,066,621 |
| 2009 | $15,029,403 | $2,254,410 | 43% | $4,013,698 | $3,268,048 | $51,260,822 |
| 2008 | $8,473,538 | $1,271,031 | 43% | $2,262,913 | $1,842,517 | $43,807,764 |
| 2007 | $6,289,037 | $943,356 | 43% | $1,679,528 | $1,367,511 | $46,130,864 |
| 2006 | $11,918,540 | $1,787,781 | 43% | $3,182,922 | $2,591,610 | $42,822,222 |
| 2005 | $11,467,531 | $1,720,130 | 43% | $3,062,478 | $2,493,541 | $37,722,402 |
| 2004 | $5,740,530 | $861,080 | 43% | $1,533,045 | $1,248,242 | $33,990,912 |
| 2003 | $18,911,536 | $2,836,730 | 43% | $5,050,447 | $4,112,193 | $31,055,650 |
| 2002 | $24,860,485 | $3,729,073 | 46% | $6,289,723 | $5,121,240 | $24,538,528 |
| 2001 | $27,990,252 | $4,198,538 | 46% | $7,081,556 | $5,765,970 | $20,020,506 |
| 2000 | $22,477,539 | $3,371,631 | 46% | $5,686,835 | $4,630,355 | $14,260,668 |
| 1999 | $17,465,176 | $2,619,776 | 46% | $4,418,704 | $3,597,812 | $9,480,568 |
| 1998 | $15,157,060 | $2,273,559 | 46% | $3,834,748 | $3,122,342 | $5,492,833 |
| 1997 | $5,205,008 | $780,751 | 46% | $1,316,871 | $1,072,228 | $2,144,643 |
| 1996 | $3,192,070 | $478,810 | 46% | $807,596 | $657,564 | $958,580 |
| 1995 | $944,876 | $141,731 | 46% | $239,054 | $194,644 | $279,006 |
| 1994 | $390,959 | $58,644 | 46% | $121,021 | $58,429 | $74,294 |
| 1993 | $160,742 | $24,111 | 46% | $58,198 | $15,582 | $15,582 |
Model Notes
- PROCURATION DE RÉSIDENCE : résidence non recherchée individuellement pour ce lot ; US-CA par défaut appliqué jusqu'à ce que documenté
- salary comps: 2 disclosed lead fee(s) flagged as non-market outliers (scale / far-below-quote) and excluded from era medians
- Crédit image : Wikimedia Commons via Wikipedia (Cameron Diaz)
Méthodologie
We rebuild Cameron’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.
Le modèle complet, chaque tableau de taux et la façon dont nos estimations ont été comparées aux offres réelles sont disponibles. page méthodologie.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is Cameron Diaz's net worth in 2026?
As of 2026, Cameron Diaz's net worth is an estimated $177.6 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 Cameron Diaz make money?
Salaires des films et participation backend documentée.
How is Cameron Diaz'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 Cameron 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 Cameron Diaz make per film?
Cela varie selon le rôle et l'époque, et le tableau film par film ci-dessus répertorie les rémunérations comptabilisées pour chaque titre. Les jours de paie divulgués entrent tels que déclarés. Les rôles non divulgués sont calqués sur ce que des acteurs comparables ont gagné à la même époque et dans la même fourchette budgétaire, les rôles principaux après la percée gagnant le plus et les rôles de soutien ou les premiers rôles une fraction documentée de ce montant.
Pourquoi le taux d'imposition est-il si élevé et les acteurs ne l'évitent-ils pas en faisant appel à une société de prêt ?
Tax comes out at the effective rate for where Cameron 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.
Pourquoi ce chiffre est-il différent de celui des autres sites à valeur nette ?
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 page méthodologie lists every source.
Quelle est la précision de cette estimation ?
Aucune estimation de la valeur nette d’un particulier n’est exacte ; celui-ci est un modèle construit à partir de données publiques. La différence est que vous pouvez voir comment il a été construit et vérifier chaque étape. Le niveau de confiance situé en haut du calcul indique dans quelle mesure le chiffre repose sur des chiffres divulgués, et la page indique où un chiffre s'appuie sur une hypothèse.
Is Cameron Diaz rich compared to the average person?
Yes. A net worth of $177.6 Million is far above the median American household, which sits near $193,000 according to Federal Reserve data.
What is Cameron Diaz's biggest source of wealth?
On this page it is film salaries, the largest line in the calculation at $212.3 Million. The full breakdown, with every other line and its source, is above.
How much does Cameron Diaz make from endorsements?
The model counts $32.0 Million in career endorsement income for Cameron: 2 named partnerships x the $4.0M annual fee from the median disclosed film deal x a 4-year term, spread across the deal years. It is an estimate, since the individual deal values are not all public, and it sits as its own line in the calculation above.
Explorez d'autres acteurs
À propos de 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” ou “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. En savoir plus sur NetWorth Explained.