2025-2026 Season — Page 31 · 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 2373 Elo rating and 49-7 record. Rankings reflect the 2025-2026 season and are based on over 500,000 tracked matches.
| # | Team | Elo | Record | Win% | Age | State |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1501 | SAVBC 14-1 | 1590 | 16-10 | 62% | 14 | CA |
| 1502 | Iowa Juniors 14-Red | 1590 | 3-0 | 100% | 14 | IA |
| 1503 | A-10 Boys 16-Black | 1589 | 21-30 | 41% | 16 | PA |
| 1504 | Ka Ulukoa 13-Lee | 1589 | 10-11 | 48% | 13 | HI |
| 1505 | RockCity 18-1 | 1589 | 17-21 | 45% | 18 | OH |
| 1506 | Emerald Rain Boys 16-Elite | 1589 | 5-1 | 83% | 16 | WA |
| 1507 | PVC Sandlot 16-White | 1589 | 8-9 | 47% | 16 | PA |
| 1508 | Phoenix 16 Ramirez | 1589 | 20-34 | 37% | 16 | OH |
| 1509 | FRVBC 14-1 | 1588 | 12-19 | 39% | 14 | CO |
| 1510 | WIndy CIty Premier B16-1 | 1588 | 43-28 | 61% | 16 | IL |
| 1511 | Ashland 14-1 | 1588 | 14-17 | 45% | 14 | OR |
| 1512 | GSL 18-St. george josh | 1588 | 13-27 | 33% | 18 | UT |
| 1513 | OMNI 15-2 elite | 1588 | 32-42 | 43% | 15 | CA |
| 1514 | Roots Volleyball Academy 16-2 | 1588 | 5-2 | 71% | 16 | TX |
| 1515 | Golden State 18-Black | 1587 | 36-26 | 58% | 18 | CA |
| 1516 | LKN 16-S boys | 1587 | 19-16 | 54% | 16 | NC |
| 1517 | 204 18-Gold | 1587 | 3-2 | 60% | 18 | |
| 1518 | Space Needle Volleyball Foundation 18 SNVF Red (PS) | 1587 | 3-1 | 75% | 18 | WA |
| 1519 | GSL 18-Elite mark/matt | 1587 | 6-2 | 75% | 18 | UT |
| 1520 | PEAK 18-1 boys | 1587 | 19-8 | 70% | 18 | OK |
| 1521 | MB Surf 16-Gold | 1586 | 3-5 | 38% | 16 | CA |
| 1522 | Aspire 18-1 gladiators | 1586 | 22-35 | 39% | 18 | CA |
| 1523 | Valley Velocity 16-Red | 1586 | 6-1 | 86% | 16 | WI |
| 1524 | Pipeline 18-2 | 1586 | 33-38 | 46% | 18 | IL |
| 1525 | CORE Volleyball 16-Titanium | 1586 | 25-14 | 64% | 16 | NJ |
| 1526 | COAST 16-Spring ismail | 1586 | 5-1 | 83% | 16 | CA |
| 1527 | No Limits 16-Boys | 1586 | 26-19 | 58% | 16 | FL |
| 1528 | Titan Premier 14 Taylor | 1585 | 24-16 | 60% | 14 | CA |
| 1529 | FPVC 16 Jason | 1585 | 16-6 | 73% | 16 | CA |
| 1530 | SMBC North 16 Molten | 1585 | 64-39 | 62% | 16 | CA |
| 1531 | Sanger 18 | 1585 | 4-1 | 80% | 18 | CA |
| 1532 | Xtreme 18-Nat-kelly | 1585 | 3-2 | 60% | 18 | NJ |
| 1533 | Urban Volleyball 16 Gold | 1584 | 19-13 | 59% | 16 | CA |
| 1534 | Absolute 18-Blue | 1584 | 20-44 | 31% | 18 | CA |
| 1535 | MN Select Boys 14-2 | 1584 | 38-22 | 63% | 14 | MN |
| 1536 | Trojan VBC 15 | 1584 | 3-1 | 75% | 15 | IA |
| 1537 | Aspire 16-1 warriors | 1584 | 31-32 | 49% | 16 | CA |
| 1538 | Apex Boys VBC 16-1 | 1584 | 20-8 | 71% | 16 | TN |
| 1539 | Tampa United BOYS 18-R | 1584 | 9-9 | 50% | 18 | FL |
| 1540 | Bay Area Eagles 15-Boys | 1583 | 3-2 | 60% | 15 | CA |
| 1541 | WAVE 15-Spring colin | 1583 | 5-3 | 63% | 15 | CA |
| 1542 | GSL 16-Elite ashlyn | 1583 | 16-13 | 55% | 16 | UT |
| 1543 | Windy City Premier B18-2 | 1583 | 48-27 | 64% | 18 | IL |
| 1544 | Premier 17U | 1583 | 13-8 | 62% | 17 | FL |
| 1545 | Team Rockstar 17-Austin | 1582 | 11-7 | 61% | 17 | CA |
| 1546 | Seaside 16-Black | 1582 | 25-25 | 50% | 16 | CA |
| 1547 | The Academy of Central Florida 15 GOLDENBULLS WHITE | 1582 | 4-1 | 80% | 15 | FL |
| 1548 | Annapolis 17U | 1582 | 27-42 | 38% | 17 | MD |
| 1549 | Sideout 15 Rob | 1582 | 5-14 | 26% | 15 | NY |
| 1550 | Sharks 18-Boys navy | 1581 | 15-7 | 68% | 18 | AL |
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.