Youth Club Girls Volleyball Team Rankings

2025-2026 Season — Page 10 · Ranked by Elo rating

Rankings last updated:

The VolleyLens Youth Club Girls Volleyball Rankings track over 4,000 girls 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 Legacy 14-1 adidas with a 2626 Elo rating and 80-6 record. Rankings reflect the 2025-2026 season and are based on over 500,000 tracked matches.

Youth Club Volleyball Power Rankings
Comprehensive girls 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 girls volleyball rankings.
#TeamEloRecordWin%AgeState
451 Nebraska ONE 17-Black 2111 36-15 71% 17 NE
452 Elevation 15-Tony 2111 43-21 67% 15 OH
453 Legacy 18-1 adidas 2111 31-22 58% 18 MI
454 AP 14-Adidas 2110 45-21 68% 14 TX
455 CoJrs 17-Kevin 2110 31-17 65% 17 CO
456 Mizuno CNVBC 16-Angela 2110 41-22 65% 16 MO
457 VAQUERAS 13-F heyner 2110 17-5 77% 13 PR
458 Academy 14 Diamond 2110 38-44 46% 14 NC
459 Integrity 16-Intense blue 2109 48-15 76% 16 TX
460 STVA 16-1 madison 2109 57-18 76% 16 TX
461 Red Rock 12 Gabriel 2109 43-9 83% 12 CA
462 TX LEGACY 15 ELITE 2109 51-20 72% 15 TX
463 CSDP Volleyball Club 15-1 2108 24-17 59% 15
464 Black Swamp 16-1 2108 55-15 79% 16 OH
465 Seal Beach 13-Black 2108 52-15 78% 13 CA
466 Tstreet 16-Bailey 2108 39-28 58% 16 CA
467 TXP 16-Black alonso 2107 44-18 70% 16 TX
468 FH 12-1 ikaika michele 2107 7-3 70% 12 TX
469 Arete Athletics 14-Navy telos 2107 6-2 75% 14
470 1st Alliance 17 Silver 2106 41-24 63% 17 IL
471 JJVA 16 Teal 2106 52-30 63% 16 FL
472 K1 Bayamon 13-Wes 2106 5-2 71% 13 PR
473 MAVS 15-Elite 2105 41-26 61% 15 KS
474 Kairos 15 Alpha 2105 36-27 57% 15 SD
475 EXCEL 16-National white 2104 41-18 69% 16 TX
476 PSVA 18-1 2104 35-6 85% 18 FL
477 Premier Nebraska 13 Gold 2104 31-18 63% 13 NE
478 SA Juniors 14-Adidas 2104 52-21 71% 14 TX
479 CUVC 15 Open 2103 46-30 61% 15 NC
480 PowerPlex 17-Mendoza 2103 46-25 65% 17 IA
481 Madfrog 12-N black 2103 43-9 83% 12 TX
482 HPSTL 14-Royal 2102 37-32 54% 14 MO
483 SIVBC 16-Thunder 2102 42-19 69% 16 WA
484 DYNASTY 16-Blue 2102 40-22 65% 16 KS
485 TW Skyline 16-Royal 2101 36-28 56% 16 TX
486 LAV 18-National black 2101 35-11 76% 18 AL
487 Rockwood Thunder 17-Elite 2101 35-26 56% 17 MO
488 Ne Jrs 17-Black 2100 21-9 70% 17
489 H Skyline 13-Royal 2100 44-22 67% 13 TX
490 Tribe 15-Vktry cardinal 2099 38-35 52% 15 FL
491 Elevation 18-Lehman 2099 30-12 71% 18 OH
492 MiElite 17-Mizuno 2099 35-33 51% 17 MI
493 JVC 14-1 2098 43-9 83% 14 IN
494 GVA 13-Pink 2098 36-8 82% 13 PR
495 PCVC 14-Nalu 2098 37-19 66% 14 BC
496 FEVA 14-Katia 2098 54-14 79% 14 FL
497 Sideout 15-N artem 2098 69-10 87% 15 NJ
498 TAV Houston 13-Black 2097 41-34 55% 13 TX
499 VVA 17-Wiechmann 2097 45-27 63% 17 CA
500 501 Volley 13-1 national 2096 50-11 82% 13 AR
← Previous12345678910111213Next →

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.