Ofcourse but not half as big as the AE stars. All Cena, Orton and Batista at their prime cant match up Hogan, Rock or Austin's star power.
5 years from now guys like KO, Roman, Rollins, Ambrose etc. will be consideres "stars".
Of course Cena, Orton and Batista can't match up to them. The overall wrestling fanbase in their time frame doesn't compare.
This is where my issue comes in with the whole "Cena didn't draw nearly as much as Rock, Austin or Hogan". Of course he fucking couldn't. Did everyone suddenly forget how much people watched wrestling during the Monday Night Wars on a regular basis?
Lets take a look at Raw in 2005 for a moment and compare it with, say, 1998. In 2005, Cena able to help Raw gradually increase their ratings for the first time in god knows how long. The increase wasn't anything earth shattering but it was none the less a significant increase. Raw was able to average around 3.8 in 2005 after averaging 3.6 the previous year. At this point, WWE was the number one pro wrestling company in the world. Nothing else came close.
In 1998, Raw's average was significantly higher than this, with a 4.35 rating average. And yet despite this, they were LOSING that year. Yes, there was another pro wrestling show for another company beating them. You had a much higher audience to work with, which meant a larger number of fans to draw in.
Since 2004, only three guys where able to actually halt WWE's ratings decline and give them a slight gradual increase. Those guys where Cena, Batista, and Daniel Bryan. To try to compare them with Rock, Austin and Hogan is unfair and makes little sense. I'm not saying they would draw as much, if not more, but if we're going to make this claim, we're gonna need more to go off of than just "look at how much Rock drew during his time!"