Youth Club Boys Volleyball Team Rankings

2025-2026 Season — Page 19 · 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 Balboa Bay 16-Blue with a 2364 Elo rating and 49-7 record. Rankings reflect the 2025-2026 season and are based on over 500,000 tracked matches.

Youth Club Volleyball Power Rankings
Comprehensive boys 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 boys volleyball rankings.
#TeamEloRecordWin%AgeState
901 Meraki VB 18-1 1696 15-19 44% 18 NH
902 SKY 17-1 1696 8-6 57% 17 IL
903 SCVC 16-Sarah 1696 9-6 60% 16 CA
904 LVC 16-Blue 1695 34-17 67% 16 NY
905 Pulse 16 Mike 1695 39-14 74% 16 CA
906 IMPACT PINK 12 1695 6-0 100% 12
907 H Skyline Boys 16 Royal 1695 28-29 49% 16 TX
908 HAVC 18-Red 1695 24-21 53% 18 IL
909 MN Select Boys 15-1 1695 40-24 63% 15 MN
910 Chicago Elite B 17-Elite 1695 31-42 41% 17 IL
911 HEAT 13-Black 1695 6-0 100% 13 CA
912 BAVC 16-1 sal 1694 0-0 0% 16
913 TVS 10 Sophie 1694 8-2 80% 10
914 Pipeline 17-Black 1694 46-18 72% 17 IL
915 Cinci Attack 17-Red 1694 29-35 45% 17 OH
916 CCVA Boys 17-Jay 1693 4-1 80% 17 CA
917 RCVA Boys 17-National 1693 3-5 38% 17 VA
918 MOD B16-White 1693 47-10 82% 16 IL
919 AZ LEGACY 17 APEX 1693 21-39 35% 17 AZ
920 BAVC 17-1 andre 1693 4-4 50% 17 CA
921 COAST 15-2 lindsey 1693 31-19 62% 15 CA
922 Ultimate B18 Gold 1693 27-27 49% 18 IL
923 808 Athletic Club 16-Kolten 1693 22-13 63% 16 HI
924 Chicago Elite B 16-Elite 1692 40-29 56% 16 IL
925 Tstreet 14-Kyla 1692 6-0 100% 14
926 RCVA 18 National 1692 24-33 42% 18 VA
927 GSL 15-Elite - earle 1692 6-9 40% 15 UT
928 Urban Volleyball 17 Gold 1692 23-12 66% 17 TX
929 Slam VBC 18-1 1692 0-0 0% 18 TX
930 Volley Next 18-2 1691 42-27 61% 18 MI
931 Salt City Boys 18-S bryan 1691 13-8 62% 18 UT
932 Spike Milwaukee B18 1691 21-17 55% 18 WI
933 RCVA 17 National 1691 28-27 51% 17 VA
934 Pacific Rim 17-1 1691 31-18 63% 17 CA
935 Balboa Bay 15-White 1691 36-27 57% 15 CA
936 Sidewinder 18-1 1691 26-16 62% 18 AZ
937 KVC 18 Forest 1690 3-5 38% 18 TN
938 Juggernaut 16-National 1 1690 23-29 44% 16 CO
939 Forest City 17 Hyperion 1690 4-2 67% 17
940 Downstate (B) 18-Black 1690 28-16 64% 18 NY
941 Inferno 18-1 national 1690 26-34 43% 18 WI
942 MVC 18-White 1689 10-12 45% 18 AZ
943 AOT Elite 17-1 1689 11-13 46% 17 AZ
944 Balboa Bay 17-Red 1689 20-15 57% 17 CA
945 Johnston 16-Boys national 1688 18-14 56% 16 IA
946 Kinnect 18 Forest 1688 22-8 73% 18 CA
947 NYC VBA 15 Nomad 1688 24-15 62% 15 NY
948 Pulse 15 Jeff 1688 44-15 75% 15 CA
949 OVC B16 1687 43-19 69% 16 WI
950 Warren Sixpack 16-3 1687 27-14 66% 16 NJ
← Previous1234567891011121314151617181920Next →

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.