College Club Women's Volleyball Team Rankings

2025-2026 Season — Page 8 · Ranked by Elo rating

Rankings last updated:

The VolleyLens College Club Women's Volleyball Rankings track hundreds of women's college club volleyball teams nationwide using an Elo rating system updated after every match. Data is aggregated from NCVF tournaments, conference play, and national qualifiers. The current #1 ranked team is San Diego St U A with a 1965 Elo rating and 43-4 record. Rankings reflect the 2025-2026 season.

Youth Club Volleyball Power Rankings
Comprehensive women's youth club volleyball rankings using advanced Elo rating system. Track team performance, win percentages, and match statistics.
Club Volleyball Standings
Real-time volleyball club standings and power rankings for competitive youth volleyball. Compare team strengths and discover top-performing clubs.
Volleyball Analytics & Statistics
Advanced volleyball analytics including Elo ratings, match history, and performance metrics. The ultimate resource for women's volleyball rankings.
#TeamEloRecordWin%AgeState
351 Arizona St U 1454 2-10 17% all
352 UW-Madison C 1454 5-8 36% all WI
353 Portland Comm C A 1454 1-5 17% all OR
354 SUNY-Oneonta A 1454 2-5 29% all NY
355 U Illinois-Chicago A 1454 3-10 21% all IL
356 Georgia Southern U 1453 0-4 0% all GA
357 N Carolina C U 1452 0-3 0% all
358 Connecticut Coll A 1452 0-3 0% all CT
359 U South Carolina B 1452 11-13 46% all SC
360 Ball State U B 1451 0-3 0% all
361 Wesleyan U 1451 0-3 0% all CT
362 Drake U 1451 6-10 38% all IA
363 CSU-Chico A 1451 9-23 28% all CA
364 U Maine A 1451 0-3 0% all ME
365 Colby College A 1450 0-3 0% all ME
366 Western Washington U 1450 11-16 41% all WA
367 U North Dakota A 1447 10-13 42% all ND
368 U North Carolina-Greensboro A 1446 0-3 0% all
369 Howard U 1446 7-10 39% all DC
370 Clarion U A 1445 2-5 29% all
371 UA Birmingham A 1445 0-4 0% all AL
372 U North Carolina-Chapel Hill B 1443 11-11 50% all NC
373 Ohio St U B 1443 12-13 48% all OH
374 U Kentucky B 1442 8-9 47% all KY
375 American U A 1441 9-12 41% all DC
376 Union U 1440 0-4 0% all
377 U Nebraska-Omaha A 1440 1-6 14% all NE
378 Stevens Inst of Tech A 1440 1-5 17% all NJ
379 U Wyoming A 1440 5-14 26% all WY
380 U Pittsburgh B 1440 7-10 41% all PA
381 Clarkson U 1440 1-5 17% all NY
382 Creighton U B 1439 1-4 20% all NE
383 Ohio Northern U 1439 0-4 0% all OH
384 Middle Tenn St U 1439 0-5 0% all TN
385 UC-San Diego B 1439 19-29 40% all CA
386 Clarion U B 1438 2-6 25% all
387 Sam Houston St U 1438 7-19 27% all TX
388 Washington and Lee U 1437 0-4 0% all VA
389 Portland State U 1437 2-8 20% all OR
390 Cleveland St U 1436 3-10 21% all OH
391 San Francisco St U 1436 10-15 40% all CA
392 Metro State Denver U B 1435 2-5 29% all CO
393 South Dakota St U 1433 6-13 32% all SD
394 American U B 1433 0-4 0% all DC
395 SUNY-Fredonia A 1431 6-11 35% all NY
396 UC-Santa Barbara C 1431 0-4 0% all CA
397 Wake Forest U B 1430 0-4 0% all NC
398 CSU-San Marcos A 1430 15-30 33% all CA
399 U Southern Maine A 1430 1-6 14% all ME
400 James Madison U B 1429 5-9 36% all VA
← Previous1234567891011Next →

Ranking Methodology

Elo Rating System

All teams start with a base rating of 1500 points. Ratings rise after wins and fall after losses, and the amount of change depends on the relative strength of the opponents — beating a stronger team gives more points than beating a weaker team. Matches are processed in chronological order so ratings evolve match-by-match.

Match Result Quality

Not every win is treated the same. A blended result quality score combines set margin (sweeps weigh more than three-set wins), point margin (total point differential, with diminishing returns on blowouts), and the binary match outcome. Dominant performances are rewarded without the system overreacting to runaway games.

Age-Adjusted Updates (Playing Up)

When youth teams cross age groups within the same gender, the older team receives an effective rating premium for the expected-outcome calculation. This corrects for the physical maturity gap that pure rating can’t see, so younger teams aren’t over-rewarded for competitive losses and older teams aren’t under-rewarded for expected wins. The adjustment is capped to avoid extrapolating into very large age gaps.

Tournament Division Strength

Top-tier brackets such as Invitational and Open carry more weight than entry-level divisions. Wins in stronger divisions earn amplified rating gains, while losses in those divisions are softened — playing up shouldn’t punish teams that lost to elite competition. Lower divisions follow the inverse pattern, so schedule strength flows directly into the ranking.

New Team Calibration

Brand-new teams enter at the 1500 baseline but have unknown true strength. During a team’s first stretch of matches their ratings move faster, so newcomers reach their real level quickly. Once a team has played enough matches, the boost is removed and updates settle into the standard cadence.

Team Data Aggregation

Tracks each team across all their participations and tournaments. Uses the highest Elo rating achieved for the ranking table, and aggregates all matches played for win/loss statistics. Filters keep gender and age group consistent within each leaderboard.