Youth Club Boys Volleyball Team Rankings

2025-2026 Season — Page 5 · 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
201 Sportime 16-1 1980 26-20 57% 16 NY
202 MVVC B 17-Black 1979 58-25 70% 17 CA
203 MKE Sting 16-2 1979 56-20 74% 16 WI
204 Orlando Gold 17-Black 1978 26-23 53% 17 FL
205 630 Volleyball 15-1 1978 38-33 54% 15 IL
206 CLUB de VOLEIBOL BORIQUEN COQUI 15-1m 1978 6-2 75% 15 PR
207 ACAD Boys 18-Red 1975 29-19 60% 18 NY
208 Cinci Attack 15 Jake 1973 35-25 58% 15 OH
209 Vegas Aces 16-1 1973 32-13 71% 16 NV
210 Tropics Boys 17-S elite marc 1973 28-13 68% 17 FL
211 630 Volleyball 14-1 1972 53-28 64% 14 IL
212 MVC 18-Black 1972 48-20 71% 18 AZ
213 Aspire 14 Groot 1971 39-12 76% 14 AZ
214 Core 17 National 1970 52-29 64% 17 CA
215 CCVA 17 Benji 1969 38-4 90% 17 CA
216 Club 1 B 17-Skronkstrong 1968 30-36 45% 17 IL
217 SBVC Boys 17 Molten 1968 11-4 73% 17 CA
218 949 B16-Black 1966 26-27 49% 16 CA
219 MAVS 15-Red 1966 39-8 83% 15 KS
220 A'o a Koa Volleyball 15-B 1964 28-14 67% 15 HI
221 Miami United 18-National michael 1962 29-29 50% 18 FL
222 SMBC Shack 17 Molten 1961 25-31 45% 17 CA
223 PSVC 18 Josh 1961 30-25 55% 18 SC
224 MN Select Boys 18-1 1958 43-21 67% 18 MN
225 C2 Attack 16-1 elite 1956 47-29 62% 16 TN
226 Pulse 16 Lila 1956 20-31 39% 16 CA
227 Vegas Aces 18-1 1956 34-13 72% 18 NV
228 RCVA 15-National 1956 45-20 69% 15 VA
229 CORE Volleyball 16-Platinum 1956 18-11 62% 16 NJ
230 Milwaukee Sting 17-1 1955 35-34 51% 17 WI
231 ACAD Boys 17-Red 1955 23-19 55% 17 NY
232 314 VBC 18-Boys 1954 44-16 73% 18 MO
233 TORRI 17-1 efrain 1953 21-12 64% 17 PR
234 Legends 17-1victor 1953 15-4 79% 17 PR
235 SASVBC B 18-Andy 1952 42-14 75% 18 HI
236 EXCEL 15-N red 1950 37-24 60% 15 TX
237 Club 1 B 18-Skronkstrong 1950 34-37 48% 18 IL
238 Team Colorado 16-Black 1950 20-16 56% 16 CO
239 Bay to Bay 17-Premier 1949 34-29 54% 17 CA
240 CCVA Boys 17-Benji 1949 5-0 100% 17 CA
241 Left Coast 13 1948 49-27 64% 13 CA
242 CSVC 17-Big slide 1947 48-10 83% 17 NY
243 SASVBC 13-Keali'i 1947 23-6 79% 13 HI
244 SASVBC B 17-Jayce 1946 24-14 63% 17 HI
245 GSL 18-Elect shane 1945 13-3 81% 18 UT
246 Inferno 16-1 national 1944 38-26 59% 16 WI
247 BORINQUEN COQUI 16-2m 1943 20-11 65% 16 PR
248 Warren Sixpack 14-1 1942 39-17 70% 14 NJ
249 Outrigger 17 1940 26-15 63% 17 HI
250 Orlando Gold 16-Black 1940 22-13 63% 16 FL
← Previous12345678Next →

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.