2025-2026 Season — Page 39 · 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1901 | MPV 18-Elite | 1535 | 3-1 | 75% | 18 | UT |
| 1902 | True North B 16-White | 1534 | 5-5 | 50% | 16 | MO |
| 1903 | Pipeline 14-1 | 1534 | 3-4 | 43% | 14 | IL |
| 1904 | STORM 17-Black | 1534 | 3-6 | 33% | 17 | CA |
| 1905 | Husky 16.2 | 1534 | 19-15 | 56% | 16 | CT |
| 1906 | Impact Boys 17-Red wes | 1534 | 5-17 | 23% | 17 | NV |
| 1907 | FRVBC 18 Legend | 1534 | 19-9 | 68% | 18 | CO |
| 1908 | Sky High 16-Chin | 1534 | 24-9 | 73% | 16 | IL |
| 1909 | WPVC Boys 18-Armour white | 1534 | 4-7 | 36% | 18 | FL |
| 1910 | 310VBC 16-Boys | 1533 | 11-7 | 61% | 16 | CA |
| 1911 | Hive 18-Black | 1533 | 18-11 | 62% | 18 | UT |
| 1912 | 1W B18 Elite | 1533 | 26-38 | 41% | 18 | WI |
| 1913 | UNION B12-Black | 1533 | 5-5 | 50% | 12 | IN |
| 1914 | Providence Junior Pilots Volleyball Club 14-Boys | 1533 | 0-0 | 0% | 14 | |
| 1915 | MVVC B 17-National | 1533 | 35-40 | 47% | 17 | CA |
| 1916 | Forza - Boys 16-Blk | 1533 | 45-30 | 58% | 16 | IL |
| 1917 | Cicero Elite B 18-Purple | 1533 | 10-7 | 59% | 18 | IL |
| 1918 | SCVC 18-Jarrett | 1532 | 20-14 | 59% | 18 | UT |
| 1919 | EXILE East 17-5 | 1532 | 3-7 | 30% | 17 | PA |
| 1920 | Husky 15.1 | 1532 | 13-12 | 52% | 15 | CT |
| 1921 | VOLTAGE 18-1 | 1532 | 3-5 | 38% | 18 | CO |
| 1922 | Velocity 17-2 national | 1532 | 11-25 | 31% | 17 | PA |
| 1923 | NJ RONIN 14-Sword | 1532 | 6-4 | 55% | 14 | NJ |
| 1924 | EXILE East 18-1 | 1532 | 13-9 | 54% | 18 | PA |
| 1925 | Cicero Elite B 16-Purple | 1532 | 13-4 | 76% | 16 | IL |
| 1926 | MTA 16-A | 1532 | 2-2 | 50% | 16 | IL |
| 1927 | Philly Boys 18 | 1532 | 7-6 | 50% | 18 | PA |
| 1928 | SLAM 18-S blue | 1532 | 16-15 | 52% | 18 | HI |
| 1929 | MNJRSB 18-1 | 1531 | 18-19 | 49% | 18 | MN |
| 1930 | Beach Cities Volleyball 18-Onyx | 1531 | 4-6 | 40% | 18 | CA |
| 1931 | VVA 12-Shaver | 1531 | 13-23 | 36% | 12 | CA |
| 1932 | SF Elite 15 Ryan | 1531 | 22-27 | 45% | 15 | CA |
| 1933 | Vortex 16-Felicia | 1531 | 10-5 | 67% | 16 | UT |
| 1934 | VOLTAGE 16-Sonja | 1531 | 5-3 | 63% | 16 | CO |
| 1935 | RAGE 16-Scott | 1531 | 4-5 | 44% | 16 | CA |
| 1936 | PalShore 16-1 | 1530 | 29-25 | 54% | 16 | SC |
| 1937 | TUVA Boys 18-Select | 1530 | 19-16 | 54% | 18 | NC |
| 1938 | Hot Shots 15 National | 1530 | 25-25 | 48% | 15 | NY |
| 1939 | T4 11-White | 1530 | 2-1 | 67% | 11 | TX |
| 1940 | Mamba 16-Purple | 1530 | 35-42 | 45% | 16 | WI |
| 1941 | Ocean Bay 18-Waves | 1530 | 12-15 | 44% | 18 | FL |
| 1942 | HAVC 16-Black | 1530 | 31-31 | 48% | 16 | IL |
| 1943 | Roch PaceBootleggr 16-Blue | 1530 | 28-22 | 56% | 16 | NY |
| 1944 | IMUA Universal Volleyball Club 18-Blue | 1530 | 4-3 | 57% | 18 | CA |
| 1945 | NLVA 15-Sam | 1529 | 25-20 | 56% | 15 | CA |
| 1946 | Team Colorado 14-Green | 1529 | 7-3 | 70% | 14 | CO |
| 1947 | KODA 16-Boys | 1529 | 2-3 | 22% | 16 | NY |
| 1948 | Ballhawks 18-2 | 1529 | 3-2 | 60% | 18 | ON |
| 1949 | NVPUR 12-Javier | 1529 | 5-5 | 50% | 12 | PR |
| 1950 | Raining Hot 12 RED | 1529 | 2-1 | 40% | 12 | UT |
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.