Rascasse Audience Intelligence

John Lithgow Audience in United States

John Lithgow has an estimated audience of 2.7M people in United States.

#634among Actor Actress or TV Star in United States
#1653among people in United States#1552in Movies & TV

The average John Lithgow fan in United States is 41.0 years old, balanced, and lives primarily in California.

Its fans are 1.1 years older than the group average of 39.9.

Women make up 52.0% of the fan base, 3.6 percentage points fewer than the group average.

Compared with the other 6621 objects in Actor Actress or TV Star, John Lithgow fans stand out for their interest in Amanda Holden, Austin Powers (film series) and Guillermo del Toro.

Most fans live in California, New York, Texas.

Top affinities include Amanda Holden, Austin Powers (film series), Guillermo del Toro, with strongest over-indexing on Amanda Holden (104.65× the country average).

Demographically, the John Lithgow audience skews balanced with an average age of 41.0, and over-indexes on personality traits such as Patriotism, Spirituality.

The typical John Lithgow fan in United States is balanced, around 41.0 years old, with strong Patriotism tendencies and a notable affinity for Amanda Holden.

Category: Movies & TV · Type: Person · Subtype: Actor Actress or TV Star

Data status: Q2/2026 · Source & method

Section 01

At a glance

Audience size
2.7M
in United States
Gender
52.0%♀
48.0% male
Age
41.0
average years
Country rank
#11092
among all objects in United States
Fig. 01

Search interest · 12-month trend

-23%
vs. last year
JanMarMayJulSepNov
Monthly searches · Source: Rascasse Solution
Section 02

Demographics of John Lithgow fans

52.0% are female, 48.0% are male, average age 41.0.

Fig. 02

Gender split

52.0%
Female
48.0%
Male
Demographic split for John Lithgow audience in United States
MetricValue
Female52.0%
Male48.0%
Average age41.0
Estimated audience size2.7M
Fig. 03

Age distribution

Ø 41.0
average years
Age distribution of the John Lithgow audience in United States
Age bracketShare%
16-2423%
25-3414%
35-4416%
45-5419%
55+27%
Fig. 04

Worldwide distribution

40.9%

of the worldwide John Lithgow audience comes from United States.

Worldwide audience distribution share by country for John Lithgow
CountryShare
United States40.9%
United Kingdom7.8%
Germany4.1%
Section 03
Affinity (×) = how much more likely a member of this audience is to live in a region than the United States average. Example: 2.0× means twice as concentrated as the national baseline.

Geography

Fig. 05

Top regions by affinity

John Lithgow fans by region: top regions in United States
#RegionReachAffinity×
01Utah~40K1.44×
02Montana~10K1.33×
03Idaho~20K1.26×
04New Hampshire~10K1.22×
05Oregon~40K1.20×
06Maine~10K1.19×
07Missouri~60K1.16×
08Vermont~6K1.14×
09Ohio~100K1.12×
10Washington~70K1.12×
11Indiana~60K1.11×
12Colorado~50K1.11×
13Kentucky~40K1.09×
14Wisconsin~50K1.08×
15Oklahoma~30K1.08×
16Kansas~30K1.08×
17Minnesota~50K1.07×
18Iowa~30K1.07×
19Tennessee~60K1.06×
20Michigan~90K1.05×
21Rhode Island~9K1.05×
22Pennsylvania~100K1.04×
23Massachusetts~60K1.04×
24Wyoming~5K1.04×
25New York~200K1.03×
26Connecticut~30K1.03×
27Nebraska~20K1.03×
28West Virginia~10K1.03×
29Illinois~100K0.99×
30Arkansas~20K0.99×
31South Dakota~7K0.97×
32New Mexico~20K0.96×
33North Dakota~6K0.95×
34Alaska~6K0.95×
35North Carolina~80K0.90×
36New Jersey~70K0.90×
37California~300K0.89×
38Florida~200K0.88×
39Arizona~50K0.88×
40South Carolina~40K0.88×
41Nevada~20K0.88×
42Virginia~60K0.87×
43Delaware~7K0.87×
44Texas~200K0.86×
45Georgia~70K0.80×
46Louisiana~30K0.79×
47Alabama~30K0.77×
48Mississippi~20K0.74×
49Hawaii~8K0.69×
50Maryland~30K0.67×
Fig. 06

Affinity by region

Affinity by region — John Lithgow, United States
0.67×1.00×1.44×
Section 04
Brands and objects ranked by affinity with this audience. Values above 1.0× mean over-representation compared with the country average.

Audience interests & affinities

Fig. 07

Top cross-interests, ranked by affinity

Affinities of the John Lithgow audience vs. the country average
#·InterestCategoryAffinity×
01Amanda HoldenMovies & TV104.65×
02Austin Powers (film series)Movies & TV101.41×
03Guillermo del ToroMovies & TV89.62×
04Ian McShaneMovies & TV87.32×
05Jon HammMovies & TV83.18×
06Vincent CasselMovies & TV81.52×
07Julie AndrewsMovies & TV52.10×
08Zach GalifianakisMovies & TV49.33×
09Cameron DiazMovies & TV44.26×
10John CleeseMovies & TV43.31×
11Alan TudykMovies & TV35.16×
12Maya RudolphMovies & TV32.31×
13Billy Bob ThorntonMovies & TV27.56×
14Anna FarisMovies & TV26.62×
15Antonio BanderasMovies & TV22.53×
16ShrekMovies & TV20.02×
17Sharon OsbourneMovies & TV20.00×
18Alison BrieMovies & TV17.40×
19Charlize TheronMovies & TV12.98×
20Michael JacksonMusic & Radio7.67×
Section 05
Strongest and weakest personality traits of this audience (1.0 = country average).

Personality of the John Lithgow audience

Fig. 08

Deviation from the national baseline

↑ What stands out
The strongest tendencies
Personality traits of the John Lithgow audience vs. the country average · What stands out
TraitClusterDeviationScore
PatriotismCONSERVATISM2.82×
SpiritualityBALANCE1.62×
Early Adopter MentalityPOWER1.28×
0×1.00× baseline2×
↓ Rather not
The weakest tendencies
Personality traits of the John Lithgow audience vs. the country average · Rather not
TraitClusterDeviationScore
Family OrientationCONSERVATISM0.63×
Luxury OrientationPREMIUM0.64×
Design AffinityPREMIUM0.76×
0×1.00× baseline2×
Appendix

Explore more audiences

Source & method

Source
Rascasse Solution, own modelling
What “fans” means here
Estimated number of people in United States with measurable interest in John Lithgow over the last 12 months. Modelled, not counted; people interested in several persons count for each of them.
Data basis
Anonymised behavioural signals: search demand, social media signals, sponsorship and event data. Not a survey.
Period
07/2025 – 06/2026 · updated quarterly · data status Q2/2026
Confidence
high gender and age data available and an audience of at least 100,000 people

Cite as: “Rascasse Solution, Q2/2026, rascasse.com/explore/us/john-lithgow-8076” · Methodology