Youth Club Boys Volleyball Team Rankings

2025-2026 Season — Page 4 · 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.

Run a club? Your club is already listed here with its teams, results and ranking. Claim it free to fix the details and add the verified badge.
What claiming gets you →
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
151 EXCEL 14-N red 2027 41-10 80% 14 TX
152 SCB 16-Salty jj 2025 47-18 72% 16 UT
153 VUVC B17-BLACK 2023 25-18 58% 17 NV
154 Balboa Bay 16-White 2021 50-13 79% 16 CA
155 Pulse 14 Daniel 2019 32-18 64% 14 CA
156 Bay to Bay 16-Premier 2019 34-24 59% 16 CA
157 MOD B15-Blue 2017 40-28 59% 15 IL
158 TUVA Boys 18-Elite 2017 47-13 78% 18 NC
159 Sidewinder 17-1 2016 35-22 61% 17 AZ
160 GSL 17-Elect colby 2015 14-1 93% 17 UT
161 Cinci Attack 18-Black 2015 41-23 64% 18 OH
162 Team Rockstar 16 Devon 2014 30-20 60% 16 CA
163 Triangle Boys 16-Black 2014 53-24 69% 16 NC
164 MAVS 16-Red 2014 33-14 70% 16 KS
165 Cinci Attack 17-Black 2011 39-24 62% 17 OH
166 JAX SKYLINE 16-B royal 2010 43-17 72% 16 FL
167 Academy Boys West 15-1 2010 38-30 56% 15 CA
168 Kaizen Boys 14-Black 2009 35-15 70% 14 OK
169 C2 Attack 15-1 elite 2008 51-24 68% 15 TN
170 SASVBC 14-Keali'i 2006 26-16 62% 14 HI
171 WPVC Boys 16-Armour black 2006 34-32 52% 16 FL
172 VUVC B16-BLACK 2006 30-22 58% 16 NV
173 AZ Fear 15-Black 2005 44-18 71% 15 AZ
174 CORE Boys 14-Platinum 2005 35-7 83% 14 NJ
175 Gentlemen of Kiwi 15 2002 49-10 83% 15 FL
176 MTRX 16-1 2002 48-18 73% 16 AZ
177 MOD B16-Black 2002 63-10 86% 16 IL
178 Roch PaceBootleggr 17-Blk 1998 39-17 68% 17 NY
179 MDJRS 17-Boys black 1998 52-25 67% 17 MD
180 Future 18-Elite 1997 33-32 51% 18 IL
181 MKE Sting 14-1 1996 54-16 77% 14 WI
182 513VB Boys 14-1 1995 39-25 61% 14 OH
183 ACAD Boys 16-Red 1995 29-18 62% 16 NY
184 Roch PaceBootlegger 18 1995 33-20 61% 18 NY
185 MVC 16-Joe 1994 39-32 55% 16 WI
186 Outrigger U15 1990 31-9 78% 15 HI
187 Academy Boys West 16-1 1990 31-26 54% 16 CA
188 GSL 16-Elect - jeremiah 1990 28-27 51% 16 UT
189 MVVC B 14-Red 1990 45-28 62% 14 CA
190 EXCEL 18-N red 1990 27-22 54% 18 TX
191 Orlando Gold 18-Black 1989 31-22 58% 18 FL
192 Sportime 18-1 1989 31-15 67% 18 NY
193 Evolution 14-Elite kalea 1986 42-24 64% 14 CA
194 VAQUEROS 17-M carlos 1986 20-9 69% 17 PR
195 Uno Boys 18-Elite 1984 48-24 67% 18 IL
196 MVVC B 12-Red 1984 60-22 73% 12 CA
197 CUVC 17-1 boys 1983 57-19 75% 17 NC
198 Gentlemen of Kiwi 17 1982 47-17 73% 17 FL
199 A4 Volley Boys 18-Tyler 1980 15-25 38% 18 CA
200 MAVS 17-Red 1980 31-20 61% 17 KS
← Previous1234567Next →

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.