Youth Club Boys Volleyball Team Rankings

2025-2026 Season — Page 9 · 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
401 Core BOYS 12-Platinum 1849 4-6 40% 12 NJ
402 VAQUEROS 14-M carlos 1848 6-10 38% 14 PR
403 JJVA Boys 18-Teal 1848 28-12 70% 18 FL
404 BIGIB 18-1 1848 20-5 80% 18 HI
405 MAVS 18-Red 1847 32-16 67% 18 KS
406 Hurricanes 16-1 1846 6-0 100% 16 ON
407 118 17-Aaron 1846 18-12 60% 17 CA
408 MDJRS 16-Boys black 1846 40-32 55% 16 MD
409 Ultimate B15 Gold 1846 30-38 44% 15 IL
410 630 Volleyball 17-1 1845 27-39 41% 17 IL
411 Lakas 18-S b2f 1845 36-27 57% 18 CA
412 L2 18-1 boys 1845 31-22 58% 18 MI
413 Forza Boys 18-Blk 1845 54-21 71% 18 IL
414 Victory 16-Black 1845 11-9 55% 16 AZ
415 TUVA Boys 17 Elite 1844 31-28 53% 17 NC
416 CA Volley 18-1 1844 16-24 40% 18 CA
417 SC Legends 13-Elite 1844 26-34 43% 13 CA
418 PSA Power 18 1844 33-7 83% 18 TX
419 RVC 16-Boys travel 1844 39-18 68% 16 VA
420 RAGE 18 TOA 1843 41-12 77% 18 CA
421 Mamba 16-Black 1843 46-34 57% 16 WI
422 GSL 14-Elect jackie 1843 21-3 88% 14 UT
423 Sky High Adidas B17-1 1843 55-29 65% 17 IL
424 Mentor 17 1843 6-4 60% 17 CA
425 PREVAIL Boys 16-Platinum 1843 10-18 36% 16 PA
426 Adversity VBC 18 Adidas 1842 39-39 50% 18 IL
427 CCVA 16 Elite 1841 25-9 74% 16 CA
428 808 Athletic Boys 18-Elton 1841 24-8 75% 18 HI
429 Warren Sixpack 16-2 1839 33-15 69% 16 NJ
430 Windy City Premier 17 1838 44-30 59% 17 IL
431 Tribe 14-B elite cardinal 1838 48-21 70% 14 FL
432 SVC 17-1 boys 1838 48-15 76% 17 NY
433 The St. James Boys 17 N 1837 21-24 46% 17 VA
434 Mill City 16 1837 24-8 75% 16 MA
435 TeamLVC Boys 18U Black 1837 31-30 51% 18 NY
436 Sky High Adidas B14-1 1837 56-29 64% 14 IL
437 MVC 17-Sydney 1836 45-31 58% 17 WI
438 Westside VBC 16-Green 1835 45-12 79% 16 CA
439 SPVB B14 Elite 1835 34-26 56% 14 IL
440 Momentum 17-Orange 1834 35-26 57% 17 OH
441 Balboa Bay 14-White 1834 39-23 63% 14 CA
442 MVVC B 14-Black 1834 50-26 66% 14 CA
443 Blue Royals 17 National 1834 20-16 56% 17 WA
444 Miami United 15-National camilo 1833 36-28 56% 15 FL
445 Bay to Bay 12-1 1833 42-27 61% 12 CA
446 MKE Sting 18-2 1832 44-27 62% 18 WI
447 MB Surf 16-Ascis chris 1832 24-20 55% 16 CA
448 AZ Fear 17-Blue 1832 33-27 55% 17 AZ
449 NorCal Boys 17-1 1830 29-26 53% 17 CA
450 Vanguard 17-Gold attia 1829 18-17 51% 17 OH
← Previous123456789101112Next →

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.