2026-2027 Season · Ranked by Elo rating
Rankings last updated:
The VolleyLens Youth Club Boys Volleyball Rankings track over 4,000 boys volleyball teams across all 50 states using an Elo rating system updated after every match. Data is aggregated from multiple tournament sources including USAV, AAU/JVA, and regional qualifiers. The current #1 ranked team is Aspire 18-Thor with a 2048 Elo rating and 16-0 record. Rankings reflect the 2026-2027 season and are based on over 500,000 tracked matches.
| # | Team | Elo | Record | Win% | Age | State |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Aspire 18-Thor | 2048 | 16-0 | 100% | 18 | AZ |
| 2 | AZ Fear 16-Black | 1991 | 12-4 | 75% | 16 | AZ |
| 3 | Aspire 17-Iron man | 1974 | 12-4 | 75% | 17 | AZ |
| 4 | AZ Fear 18-Black | 1971 | 12-4 | 75% | 18 | AZ |
| 5 | AZ Fear 16-1 west | 1942 | 16-0 | 100% | 16 | AZ |
| 6 | Aspire 16-Hawkeye | 1924 | 15-1 | 94% | 16 | AZ |
| 7 | Salt City Boys 17-Salty reed | 1908 | 8-0 | 100% | 17 | UT |
| 8 | Aspire 16-Spiderman | 1892 | 11-5 | 69% | 16 | AZ |
| 9 | Eclipse Boys 14-S solar | 1885 | 14-0 | 100% | 14 | CA |
| 10 | AZ Fear 17-1 west | 1875 | 10-6 | 63% | 17 | AZ |
| 11 | Az Fear 18-Blue | 1874 | 8-8 | 50% | 18 | AZ |
| 12 | Aspire 15-Black panther | 1853 | 10-6 | 63% | 15 | AZ |
| 13 | Salt City Boys 18-Salty shane | 1853 | 7-0 | 100% | 18 | UT |
| 14 | Maverick 17-Stealth | 1848 | 15-5 | 71% | 17 | AZ |
| 15 | AZ Fear 15-Black | 1848 | 8-8 | 50% | 15 | AZ |
| 16 | AZ Fear 14-Black | 1842 | 15-1 | 94% | 14 | AZ |
| 17 | Victory 16-Black | 1837 | 9-7 | 56% | 16 | AZ |
| 18 | MVC 16-Elite | 1837 | 9-7 | 56% | 16 | AZ |
| 19 | Victory 18-Black | 1828 | 9-7 | 56% | 18 | AZ |
| 20 | UCVC 16-Mccall | 1825 | 12-0 | 100% | 16 | |
| 21 | C2 Attack 18-1 elite | 1821 | 6-0 | 100% | 18 | TN |
| 22 | Nova 18-Boys | 1820 | 13-3 | 76% | 18 | AZ |
| 23 | Team Rockstar 18-Milan | 1819 | 11-1 | 92% | 18 | CA |
| 24 | Club GSL National 17-1 | 1813 | 15-3 | 83% | 17 | |
| 25 | Team Colorado 17-Black | 1812 | 11-0 | 100% | 17 | CO |
| 26 | Club GSL St. George 18-Alaina | 1811 | 14-2 | 88% | 18 | UT |
| 27 | Vortex 18-National - des | 1809 | 19-0 | 100% | 18 | UT |
| 28 | Tribe 16-B elite cardinal | 1800 | 6-0 | 100% | 16 | FL |
| 29 | NCVC 16-Mizuno | 1798 | 13-1 | 93% | 16 | CA |
| 30 | Salt City Boys 16-Salty kris | 1797 | 8-0 | 100% | 16 | UT |
| 31 | MVC 17-Elite | 1795 | 8-8 | 50% | 17 | AZ |
| 32 | Cinci Attack 17-Black | 1790 | 6-0 | 100% | 17 | OH |
| 33 | Maverick 17-Rooster | 1789 | 12-8 | 57% | 17 | AZ |
| 34 | Cinci Attack 16-Red | 1782 | 5-1 | 83% | 16 | OH |
| 35 | ATOMIC 18-Black | 1781 | 6-10 | 38% | 18 | AZ |
| 36 | Club GSL National 18-1 | 1780 | 12-4 | 75% | 18 | |
| 37 | Tribe 18-B elite cardinal | 1779 | 6-0 | 100% | 18 | FL |
| 38 | AOT 16-1 | 1775 | 16-5 | 76% | 16 | AZ |
| 39 | Zona VBC 17-Slunks | 1775 | 8-8 | 50% | 17 | AZ |
| 40 | Maverick 16-Goose | 1775 | 13-8 | 62% | 16 | AZ |
| 41 | South County 18-Jemesa/trent | 1775 | 7-1 | 88% | 18 | UT |
| 42 | OMNI 14-1 national | 1772 | 12-2 | 86% | 14 | CA |
| 43 | Miami United 18-National sebi | 1770 | 8-2 | 80% | 18 | FL |
| 44 | Premier 18-Tiger | 1769 | 12-1 | 92% | 18 | OH |
| 45 | Salt City Boys 14-Salty jj | 1764 | 7-1 | 88% | 14 | UT |
| 46 | Maverick 16-Wolfman | 1763 | 7-9 | 44% | 16 | AZ |
| 47 | South County 16-Nap/zack | 1757 | 11-3 | 79% | 16 | UT |
| 48 | Club GSL National 16-1 | 1756 | 11-5 | 69% | 16 | |
| 49 | Deer Creek 18-1 | 1756 | 11-2 | 85% | 18 | UT |
| 50 | AZ LEGACY 18-Apex | 1756 | 12-9 | 55% | 18 | AZ |
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.