Aamir Khan 순자산 2026
최종 업데이트 August 3, 2026
As of 2026, Aamir Khan has an estimated net worth of $262.1 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
- 공개된 급여 및 문서화된 백엔드(각각 인용 포함)
- 시대, 예산 범위, 경력 단계에 따라 공개된 비교 대상을 모델로 한 비공개 역할
- 공개된 중앙값에서 추정된 백엔드, 보증 및 생성 크레딧
Fast Facts
| Birthdate | March 14, 1965 |
|---|---|
| Birthplace | Mumbai |
| Breakthrough | Qayamat Se Qayamat Tak (1988) |
| Best Known | Dangal (2016) |
Who Is Aamir Khan?
Aamir Khan was born March 14, 1965 in Mumbai, best known for Dangal (2016). The earnings behind Aamir's net worth come from film salaries, backend participation, and endorsement deals.
The model tracks Aamir's earning years from 1973 to 2026, with the biggest single year in 1990 at about $23.3 Million of gross income. After representation fees, taxes, and living costs, what stays invested compounds at market returns into an estimated $262.1 Million today.
Data
아래의 모든 라인은 공개 데이터와 당사에 게시된 요율표를 바탕으로 계산되었습니다. 방법론 페이지. 신뢰: C등급. 문서화된 숫자는 이 수치의 작은 부분만을 차지하므로 대부분은 게시된 요율 및 비교 항목(등급은 주로 문서화된 A부터 대부분 모델링된 C까지)을 기준으로 모델링됩니다.
The Calculation
| Line | Amount |
|---|---|
| Revenue | |
| Film pay, modeled lead roles (52 of 74 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 | $133,255,958 |
| Film pay, modeled post-breakthrough supporting roles (17 of 74 films) 12.0% of lead cells: lane_benchmarks role/post_breakthrough_supporting_ratio | $30,960,704 |
| Film pay, modeled supporting and early roles (5 of 74 films) 시대 중앙값의 2.5%: 스타덤에 오르기 전 비율 | $775,179 |
| 백엔드 포인트, 추정 12% of disclosed lead deals included points, at a median 2.6% of box office; expected value on 41 commercially viable undisclosed lead roles; cash spread over 3 years; 16 film(s) used band-specific box-office/budget multiples as a gross proxy | $5,751,484 |
| 추천 수, 추정(3개 브랜드 파트너십) 3 named partnerships x the $4.0M annual fee from the median disclosed film deal x a 4-year term, spread across the deal years | $48,000,000 |
| 잔차, 추정 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; 28 film(s) used band-specific box-office proxies | $13,422,095 |
| 저축에 대한 투자 수익 mixed portfolio: 55% actual 60/40 securities returns (taxed) + 45% US long-run home-price rate on the rest | $208,414,354 |
| Expenses | |
| 대리 수수료 대리인 10% + 변호사 5% | -$34,470,456 |
| Taxes India effective rates, year by year | -$75,368,063 |
| 개인 지출 measured household savings rates by income, times a 88% entertainment-household factor | -$66,254,821 |
| 추정 순자산 | $262,124,056 |
영화별 영화
| Film | Year | Role | Budget | 매표소 | 계산된 급여 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Batwara 1947 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 |
| Ek Din no disclosed fee: modeled on the $25.0M median for its era and nearest band (mid), capped at $0.4M | 2026 | Lead | $2,868,340 | $582,847 | $430,251 |
| Happy Patel: Khatarnak Jasoos 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) | 2026 | Supporting | $70,000,000 | $784,778 | $2,850,000 |
| Coolie no disclosed fee: post-breakthrough supporting at 12.0% of the $21.7M shrunk median for 2020s/mid (n=1) (lane_benchmarks role/post_breakthrough_supporting_ratio) | 2025 | Supporting | $43,025,100 | $68,209,125 | $2,600,000 |
| Sitaare Zameen Par no disclosed fee: modeled on the $25.0M median for its era and nearest band (mid), capped at $2.1M | 2025 | Lead | $13,997,499 | $30,575,357 | $2,099,625 |
| The Ba***ds of Bollywood 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) | 2025 | Supporting | $70,000,000 | – | $2,850,000 |
| Angry Young Men 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) | 2024 | Supporting | $70,000,000 | – | $2,850,000 |
| The Great Indian Kapil Show 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) | 2024 | Supporting | $70,000,000 | – | $2,850,000 |
| Laapataa Ladies no disclosed fee: modeled on the $25.0M median for its era and nearest band (mid), capped at $0.1M | 2023 | Lead | $542,168 | $3,043,373 | $81,325 |
| The Romantics no disclosed fee: post-breakthrough supporting at 12.0% of the $25.0M median for its era and nearest band (mid) (lane_benchmarks role/post_breakthrough_supporting_ratio), capped at 15% of budget | 2023 | Supporting | $4,500,000 | $123,820 | $675,000 |
| Laal Singh Chaddha no disclosed fee: modeled on the $21.7M shrunk median for 2020s/mid (n=1), capped at $3.4M | 2022 | Lead | $22,899,456 | $15,662,650 | $3,434,918 |
| Salaam Venky 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 | $253,166 | $2,850,000 |
| Koi Jaane Na 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) | 2021 | Supporting | $70,000,000 | – | $2,850,000 |
| Rubaru Roshni 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) | 2019 | Supporting | $40,000,000 | – | $1,320,000 |
| Thugs of Hindostan no disclosed fee: modeled on the $11.0M shrunk median for 2010s/mid (n=3), capped at $6.0M | 2018 | Lead | $40,000,000 | $47,093,494 | $6,000,000 |
| Secret Superstar no disclosed fee: modeled on the $11.0M shrunk median for 2010s/mid (n=3), capped at $6.0M | 2017 | Lead | $40,000,000 | $148,337,994 | $6,000,000 |
| Dangal no disclosed fee: modeled on the $5.0M median for its era and nearest band (mid), capped at $1.6M | 2016 | Lead | $10,417,393 | $302,900,000 | $1,562,609 |
| Dil Dhadakne Do 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) | 2015 | Supporting | $8,573,394 | $22,446,706 | $600,000 |
| PK no disclosed fee: modeled on the $5.0M median for its era and nearest band (mid), capped at $3.0M | 2014 | Lead | $19,990,322 | $126,150,403 | $2,998,548 |
| Bombay Talkies 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) | 2013 | Supporting | $5,119,641 | $1,706,547 | $600,000 |
| Dhoom 3 no disclosed fee: modeled on the $5.0M median for its era and nearest band (mid), capped at $2.6M | 2013 | Lead | $17,065,470 | $95,010,298 | $2,559,820 |
| C.I.D. no disclosed fee: modeled on the $11.0M shrunk median for 2010s/mid (n=3), capped at $6.0M | 2012 | Lead | $40,000,000 | – | $5,999,999 |
| Talaash: The Answer Lies Within no disclosed fee: modeled on the $5.0M median for its era and nearest band (mid), capped at $2.0M | 2012 | Lead | $13,286,613 | $33,220,276 | $1,992,992 |
| Big in Bollywood 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) | 2011 | Supporting | $40,000,000 | – | $1,320,000 |
| Delhi Belly 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) | 2011 | Supporting | $4,928,171 | $18,769,903 | $600,000 |
| Dhobi Ghat no disclosed fee: modeled on the $5.0M median for its era and nearest band (mid), capped at $1.3M | 2010 | Lead | $8,747,796 | $5,598,589 | $1,312,169 |
| Peepli Live no disclosed fee: modeled on the $5.0M median for its era and nearest band (mid), capped at $0.3M | 2010 | Lead | $2,186,949 | $10,245,856 | $328,042 |
| Phir Mile Sur Mera Tumhara no disclosed fee: modeled on the $11.0M shrunk median for 2010s/mid (n=3), capped at $6.0M | 2010 | Lead | $40,000,000 | – | $5,999,998 |
| 3 Idiots no disclosed fee: modeled on the $18.8M median for its era and nearest band (mid), capped at $1.7M | 2009 | Lead | $11,362,400 | $60,262,836 | $1,704,359 |
| Luck by Chance 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 | 2009 | Supporting | $3,098,836 | $5,991,084 | $464,825 |
| Ghajini no disclosed fee: modeled on the $18.8M median for its era and nearest band (mid), capped at $1.8M | 2008 | Lead | $11,952,600 | $44,725,711 | $1,792,888 |
| Jaane Tu... Ya Jaane Na no disclosed fee: modeled on the $18.8M median for its era and nearest band (mid), capped at $0.5M | 2008 | Lead | $3,447,866 | $19,308,047 | $517,180 |
| Taare Zameen Par no disclosed fee: modeled on the $18.8M median for its era and nearest band (mid), capped at $0.4M | 2007 | Lead | $2,902,158 | $23,817,043 | $435,324 |
| Fanaa no disclosed fee: modeled on the $19.4M shrunk median for 2000s/mid (n=2), capped at $6.0M | 2006 | Lead | $40,000,000 | $23,281,166 | $5,999,966 |
| Rang De Basanti no disclosed fee: modeled on the $19.4M shrunk median for 2000s/mid (n=2), capped at $6.0M | 2006 | Lead | $40,000,000 | $21,608,136 | $5,999,966 |
| Mangal Pandey: The Rising no disclosed fee: modeled on the $18.8M median for its era and nearest band (mid), capped at $1.3M | 2005 | Lead | $8,390,028 | $11,920,642 | $1,258,495 |
| Madness in the Desert 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) | 2004 | Supporting | $40,000,000 | – | $2,324,957 |
| Roop Kumar Rathod no disclosed fee: modeled on the $19.4M shrunk median for 2000s/mid (n=2), capped at $6.0M | 2003 | Lead | $40,000,000 | – | $5,999,750 |
| Dil Chahta Hai no disclosed fee: modeled on the $18.8M median for its era and nearest band (mid), capped at $0.3M | 2001 | Lead | $1,695,403 | $8,417,677 | $254,310 |
| Lagaan no disclosed fee: modeled on the $18.8M median for its era and nearest band (mid), capped at $0.8M | 2001 | Lead | $5,298,135 | $13,980,719 | $794,664 |
| Mela no disclosed fee: modeled on the $18.8M median for its era and nearest band (mid), capped at $0.6M | 2000 | Lead | $4,005,198 | $5,562,775 | $600,735 |
| Mann no disclosed fee: modeled on the $2.0M median for its era and nearest band (small), capped at $0.5M | 1999 | Lead | $3,251,623 | $8,233,574 | $487,458 |
| Sarfarosh no disclosed fee: modeled on the $2.0M median for its era and nearest band (small), capped at $0.3M | 1999 | Lead | $1,858,070 | $7,771,379 | $278,561 |
| Earth no disclosed fee: modeled on the $14.4M shrunk median for 1990s/mid (n=6), capped at $3.9M | 1998 | Lead | $26,000,000 | – | $3,895,500 |
| Ghulam no disclosed fee: modeled on the $2.0M median for its era and nearest band (small), capped at $0.3M | 1998 | Lead | $1,817,769 | $5,865,335 | $272,382 |
| Ishq no disclosed fee: modeled on the $2.0M median for its era and nearest band (small), capped at $0.5M | 1997 | Lead | $3,029,194 | $12,560,141 | $453,379 |
| Raja Hindustani no disclosed fee: modeled on the $2.0M median for its era and nearest band (small), capped at $0.2M | 1996 | Lead | $1,622,773 | – | $242,487 |
| Aatank Hi Aatank no disclosed fee: modeled on the $14.4M shrunk median for 1990s/mid (n=6), capped at $3.9M | 1995 | Lead | $26,000,000 | – | $3,867,016 |
| Akele Hum Akele Tum no disclosed fee: modeled on the $2.0M median for its era and nearest band (small), capped at $0.2M | 1995 | Lead | $1,387,729 | $3,814,714 | $206,686 |
| Baazi no disclosed fee: modeled on the $2.0M median for its era and nearest band (small), capped at $0.2M | 1995 | Lead | $1,002,249 | $2,713,782 | $149,403 |
| Rangeela no disclosed fee: modeled on the $2.0M median for its era and nearest band (small), capped at $0.2M | 1995 | Lead | $1,387,729 | $10,300,036 | $206,686 |
| Andaz Apna Apna no disclosed fee: modeled on the $14.4M shrunk median for 1990s/mid (n=6), capped at $4.3M | 1994 | Lead | $29,000,000 | $8,650,000 | $4,278,224 |
| Damini no disclosed fee: post-breakthrough supporting at 12.0% of the $14.4M shrunk median for 1990s/mid (n=6) (lane_benchmarks role/post_breakthrough_supporting_ratio) | 1993 | Supporting | $26,000,000 | $3,853,307 | $1,677,961 |
| Hum Hain Rahi Pyar Ke no disclosed fee: modeled on the $14.4M shrunk median for 1990s/mid (n=6), capped at $3.9M | 1993 | Lead | $26,000,000 | $3,181,028 | $3,778,042 |
| Parampara no disclosed fee: modeled on the $14.4M shrunk median for 1990s/mid (n=6), capped at $3.9M | 1993 | Lead | $26,000,000 | – | $3,778,042 |
| Pehla Nasha no disclosed fee: post-breakthrough supporting at 12.0% of the $14.4M shrunk median for 1990s/mid (n=6) (lane_benchmarks role/post_breakthrough_supporting_ratio) | 1993 | Supporting | $26,000,000 | – | $1,677,961 |
| Daulat Ki Jung no disclosed fee: modeled on the $14.4M shrunk median for 1990s/mid (n=6), capped at $3.9M | 1992 | Lead | $26,000,000 | – | $3,669,969 |
| Isi Ka Naam Zindagi no disclosed fee: modeled on the $14.4M shrunk median for 1990s/mid (n=6), capped at $3.9M | 1992 | Lead | $26,000,000 | – | $3,669,969 |
| Jo Jeeta Wohi Sikandar no disclosed fee: modeled on the $14.4M shrunk median for 1990s/mid (n=6), capped at $3.9M | 1992 | Lead | $26,000,000 | $2,006,321 | $3,669,969 |
| Afsana Pyaar Ka no disclosed fee: modeled on the $14.4M shrunk median for 1990s/mid (n=6), capped at $3.9M | 1991 | Lead | $26,000,000 | – | $3,477,947 |
| Dil Hai Ke Manta Nahin no disclosed fee: modeled on the $14.4M shrunk median for 1990s/mid (n=6), capped at $3.9M | 1991 | Lead | $26,000,000 | $1,846,768 | $3,477,947 |
| Awwal Number soft-breakthrough blend (w=0.79): no disclosed fee: modeled on the $14.4M shrunk median for 1990s/mid (n=6), capped at $3.9M vs early terms | 1990 | Lead | $26,000,000 | – | $3,161,395 |
| Deewana Mujh Sa Nahin soft-breakthrough blend (w=0.79): no disclosed fee: modeled on the $14.4M shrunk median for 1990s/mid (n=6), capped at $3.9M vs early terms | 1990 | Lead | $26,000,000 | – | $3,161,395 |
| Dil soft-breakthrough blend (w=0.79): no disclosed fee: modeled on the $2.0M median for its era and nearest band (small), capped at $0.2M vs early terms | 1990 | Lead | $1,142,629 | $11,420,000 | $146,070 |
| Jawani Zindabad soft-breakthrough blend (w=0.79): no disclosed fee: modeled on the $14.4M shrunk median for 1990s/mid (n=6), capped at $3.9M vs early terms | 1990 | Lead | $26,000,000 | – | $3,161,395 |
| Tum Mere Ho soft-breakthrough blend (w=0.79): no disclosed fee: modeled on the $14.4M shrunk median for 1990s/mid (n=6), capped at $3.9M vs early terms | 1990 | Lead | $26,000,000 | – | $3,161,395 |
| Love Love Love soft-breakthrough blend (w=0.66): no disclosed fee: modeled on the $4.1M shrunk median for pre1990/small (n=2), capped at $2.1M vs early terms | 1989 | Lead | $14,000,000 | $1,725,679 | $1,422,573 |
| Raakh soft-breakthrough blend (w=0.66): no disclosed fee: modeled on the $4.1M shrunk median for pre1990/small (n=2), capped at $2.1M vs early terms | 1989 | Lead | $14,000,000 | – | $1,422,573 |
| Qayamat Se Qayamat Tak soft-breakthrough blend (w=0.50): no disclosed fee: modeled on the $4.1M shrunk median for pre1990/small (n=2), capped at $2.1M vs early terms | 1988 | Lead | $14,000,000 | $3,592,707 | $1,101,562 |
| Holi no disclosed fee: 2.5% of the $4.1M shrunk median for pre1990/small (n=2) (pre-stardom rate); soft-breakthrough weight 0.06 | 1984 | Lead | $14,000,000 | – | $232,860 |
| Manzil Manzil no disclosed fee: 2.5% of the $4.1M shrunk median for pre1990/small (n=2) (pre-stardom rate); soft-breakthrough weight 0.06 | 1984 | Lead | $14,000,000 | – | $232,860 |
| Paranoia no disclosed fee: 2.5% of the $4.1M shrunk median for pre1990/small (n=2) (pre-stardom rate); soft-breakthrough weight 0.03 | 1983 | Lead | $14,000,000 | – | $171,908 |
| Madhosh no disclosed fee: 2.5% of the $2.8M median for its era and nearest band (small) (pre-stardom rate); soft-breakthrough weight 0.00 | 1974 | Lead | $3,025,000 | – | $68,784 |
| Yaadon Ki Baaraat no disclosed fee: 2.5% of the $2.8M median for its era and nearest band (small) (pre-stardom rate); soft-breakthrough weight 0.00 | 1973 | Lead | $3,025,000 | $7,100,000 | $68,767 |
모델링된 수치의 작동 방식. 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 방법론 페이지.
순자산 Over Time
아래의 연도별 표와 일치하는 매년 말의 모델링된 잔액입니다.
해마다
| Year | Income | 담당자 수수료 | 세율 | Spent | Saved | Balance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026 | $10,260,393 | $1,539,059 | 42% | $2,788,176 | $2,270,198 | $262,124,056 |
| 2025 | $9,837,928 | $1,475,689 | 42% | $2,673,374 | $2,176,724 | $254,696,259 |
| 2024 | $6,674,838 | $1,001,226 | 42% | $1,813,831 | $1,476,864 | $232,766,546 |
| 2023 | $2,714,234 | $407,135 | 42% | $737,570 | $600,547 | $211,491,479 |
| 2022 | $5,149,941 | $772,491 | 42% | $1,399,453 | $1,139,468 | $190,792,350 |
| 2021 | $4,395,402 | $659,310 | 42% | $1,194,414 | $972,520 | $203,519,697 |
| 2020 | $1,468,929 | $220,339 | 42% | $399,169 | $325,013 | $184,332,324 |
| 2019 | $1,715,980 | $257,397 | 42% | $466,303 | $379,675 | $169,333,044 |
| 2018 | $5,707,306 | $856,096 | 34% | $1,764,831 | $1,436,967 | $150,033,087 |
| 2017 | $6,989,258 | $1,048,389 | 34% | $2,161,241 | $1,759,733 | $147,733,357 |
| 2016 | $3,707,172 | $556,076 | 34% | $1,146,344 | $933,380 | $133,179,745 |
| 2015 | $1,493,720 | $224,058 | 34% | $461,893 | $376,084 | $124,373,054 |
| 2014 | $2,924,316 | $438,647 | 34% | $904,266 | $736,275 | $120,885,822 |
| 2013 | $3,612,797 | $541,920 | 34% | $1,117,161 | $909,619 | $111,701,039 |
| 2012 | $6,967,960 | $1,045,194 | 30% | $2,285,240 | $1,860,696 | $99,134,071 |
| 2011 | $4,123,619 | $618,543 | 30% | $1,352,399 | $1,101,155 | $90,135,709 |
| 2010 | $6,323,631 | $948,545 | 30% | $2,073,923 | $1,688,637 | $85,344,268 |
| 2009 | $4,125,333 | $618,800 | 30% | $1,352,961 | $1,101,612 | $77,378,583 |
| 2008 | $2,513,544 | $377,032 | 30% | $824,352 | $671,207 | $68,372,664 |
| 2007 | $1,183,593 | $177,539 | 30% | $388,176 | $316,062 | $74,421,740 |
| 2006 | $8,666,405 | $1,299,961 | 30% | $2,842,269 | $2,314,242 | $70,441,455 |
| 2005 | $4,718,026 | $707,704 | 30% | $1,547,343 | $1,259,883 | $63,149,618 |
| 2004 | $2,225,022 | $333,753 | 30% | $729,727 | $594,161 | $59,467,505 |
| 2003 | $5,134,642 | $770,196 | 30% | $1,683,978 | $1,371,134 | $55,362,867 |
| 2002 | $2,026,740 | $304,011 | 30% | $664,698 | $541,212 | $48,941,463 |
| 2001 | $992,211 | $148,832 | 30% | $325,409 | $264,956 | $49,903,854 |
| 2000 | $1,134,034 | $170,105 | 30% | $371,922 | $302,828 | $49,660,252 |
| 1999 | $1,123,453 | $168,518 | 30% | $368,452 | $300,002 | $48,589,946 |
| 1998 | $3,511,374 | $526,706 | 30% | $1,151,604 | $937,663 | $44,947,219 |
| 1997 | $1,935,513 | $290,327 | 30% | $634,779 | $516,852 | $39,613,346 |
| 1996 | $659,723 | $98,958 | 37% | $238,253 | $115,028 | $34,742,495 |
| 1995 | $3,535,264 | $530,290 | 37% | $1,043,495 | $849,638 | $31,848,319 |
| 1994 | $4,728,475 | $709,271 | 37% | $1,395,693 | $1,136,406 | $26,908,903 |
| 1993 | $9,346,593 | $1,401,989 | 37% | $2,758,811 | $2,246,289 | $25,312,817 |
| 1992 | $11,500,893 | $1,725,134 | 37% | $3,394,691 | $2,764,037 | $21,678,456 |
| 1991 | $20,588,006 | $3,088,201 | 45% | $5,305,241 | $4,319,652 | $17,955,897 |
| 1990 | $23,295,750 | $3,494,363 | 45% | $6,002,989 | $4,887,775 | $12,226,878 |
| 1989 | $17,876,203 | $2,681,430 | 45% | $4,606,447 | $3,750,678 | $7,147,048 |
| 1988 | $13,653,228 | $2,047,984 | 45% | $3,518,246 | $2,864,638 | $3,043,764 |
| 1987 | $359,059 | $53,859 | 45% | $113,205 | $54,655 | $167,288 |
| 1986 | $28,590 | $4,289 | 45% | $12,072 | $1,294 | $108,654 |
| 1985 | $28,590 | $4,289 | 45% | $12,072 | $1,294 | $98,777 |
| 1984 | $337,382 | $50,607 | 55% | $87,030 | $42,018 | $86,453 |
| 1983 | $266,116 | $39,917 | 55% | $68,647 | $33,143 | $41,997 |
| 1982 | $57,637 | $8,646 | 55% | $19,912 | $2,134 | $8,678 |
| 1981 | $6,065 | $910 | 55% | $2,095 | $225 | $6,414 |
| 1980 | $6,065 | $910 | 55% | $2,095 | $225 | $6,067 |
| 1979 | $6,065 | $910 | 55% | $2,095 | $225 | $5,727 |
| 1978 | $6,065 | $910 | 55% | $2,095 | $225 | $5,393 |
| 1977 | $6,065 | $910 | 55% | $2,095 | $225 | $5,066 |
| 1976 | $6,065 | $910 | 55% | $2,095 | $225 | $4,745 |
| 1975 | $6,065 | $910 | 55% | $2,095 | $225 | $4,431 |
| 1974 | $73,001 | $10,950 | 65% | $19,616 | $2,102 | $4,123 |
| 1973 | $68,767 | $10,315 | 65% | $18,478 | $1,980 | $1,980 |
Model Notes
- RESIDENCE PROXY: India resident; model uses India tax proxy if present else US-CA fallback in rates table
- salary comps: 2 disclosed lead fee(s) flagged as non-market outliers (scale / far-below-quote) and excluded from era medians
- 이미지 출처: Wikimedia Commons via Wikipedia (Aamir Khan)
방법론
We rebuild Aamir’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.
전체 모델, 모든 요율표 및 실제 거래와 비교하여 추정치를 확인한 방법은 다음과 같습니다. 방법론 페이지.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is Aamir Khan's net worth in 2026?
As of 2026, Aamir Khan's net worth is an estimated $262.1 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 Aamir Khan make money?
영화 급여 및 문서화된 백엔드 참여.
How is Aamir Khan'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 Aamir 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 Aamir Khan make per film?
역할과 시대에 따라 다르며 위의 영화별 표에는 모든 타이틀에 대해 계산된 급여가 나열되어 있습니다. 공개된 급여일은 보고된 대로 입력됩니다. 공개되지 않은 역할은 같은 시대와 예산 범위에서 비슷한 배우가 얻은 것을 모델로 하며, 획기적인 이후의 주연은 가장 많은 수익을 올리고 조연 또는 초기 역할은 그 중 문서화된 부분을 차지합니다.
세율이 왜 이렇게 높은데, 배우들은 대출회사를 통해서 피하지 않는 걸까요?
Tax comes out at the effective rate for where Aamir 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.
이 수치가 다른 순자산 사이트와 다른 이유는 무엇입니까?
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 방법론 페이지 lists every source.
이 추정치는 얼마나 정확합니까?
개인의 순자산 추정치는 정확하지 않습니다. 이것은 공개 데이터로 구축된 모델입니다. 차이점은 어떻게 제작되었는지 볼 수 있고 모든 단계를 확인할 수 있다는 점입니다. 계산 상단 근처의 신뢰 등급은 수치 중 공개된 숫자에 얼마나 많은 영향을 미치는지 보여주며 페이지에는 숫자가 가정에 의존하는 위치가 표시됩니다.
Is Aamir Khan rich compared to the average person?
Yes. A net worth of $262.1 Million is far above the median American household, which sits near $193,000 according to Federal Reserve data.
What is Aamir Khan's biggest source of wealth?
On this page it is film salaries, the largest line in the calculation at $133.3 Million. The full breakdown, with every other line and its source, is above.
How much does Aamir Khan make from endorsements?
The model counts $48.0 Million in career endorsement income for Aamir: 3 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.
다른 배우 탐색
NetWorth Explained 소개
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” 또는 “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. NetWorth Explained에 대해 자세히 알아보세요..