Youth Club Girls Volleyball Team Rankings

2025-2026 Season — Page 112 · 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
5551 Madtown 15-1 select 1706 38-15 72% 15 WI
5552 Texas Fury 15-Impact 1706 31-18 63% 15 TX
5553 CSVC 16-Blue 1706 34-10 77% 16 NC
5554 863 Elite 14-1 black 1706 38-20 66% 14 FL
5555 Prime Performance 13-Festival 1706 9-2 82% 13 CA
5556 SPARKS VBC 13-Navy 1706 39-12 76% 13 PA
5557 Tsunami 15-1e trina 1706 30-25 55% 15 GA
5558 X-Factor Volleyball 14 1706 27-10 71% 14 VA
5559 Valley Evolution 14 1706 19-8 70% 14 TX
5560 Monon 14-4r fireball 1706 39-9 81% 14 IN
5561 Momentum Volleyball 13-Reven 1706 23-14 62% 13 CO
5562 Amarillo Xtreme 12-Outlaws 1706 21-6 78% 12 TX
5563 Amarillo Xtreme 10 Thunder 1706 15-7 68% 10 TX
5564 Iowa Select 12-Mizuno 1706 21-9 64% 12 IA
5565 SPVB 13 Elite 1706 25-27 48% 13 IL
5566 Club 801 13-Club abby 1706 17-10 55% 13 UT
5567 ACT 17-Henry 1706 34-27 56% 17 CA
5568 NNJ 17 Jason 1706 22-33 40% 17 NV
5569 CALI 17-Black 1706 23-31 43% 17 NY
5570 FRVBC 17-Rahul 1706 23-10 70% 17 CO
5571 Lanier 16-Nat. katie 1706 16-6 73% 16 GA
5572 TopSpin 13-Red 1706 22-8 73% 13 PR
5573 Oak Creek K-Force 14 1706 35-11 74% 14 WI
5574 MVVC 18-Black 1706 44-19 70% 18 CA
5575 OP2 17-1 elite 1706 5-1 83% 17
5576 EIVA BALDWIN 16 1706 16-7 70% 16
5577 Memphis Metro 13-Elite black 1706 4-3 57% 13
5578 Delano 14-1 1705 14-2 88% 14
5579 Rocks 11-Grenda 1705 16-4 80% 11
5580 QCA 15-Under armour black 1705 18-11 62% 15
5581 NOALL 14-Teal 1705 10-2 83% 14
5582 ALJRS 13 National 1705 34-10 77% 13
5583 CoJrs 18-Trevor 1705 7-2 78% 18 CO
5584 PAEVA 18-Maroon 1705 38-16 70% 18 CA
5585 Sunshine 13-South bay 1705 27-34 44% 13 CA
5586 PCVC 13 Nalu 1705 27-18 60% 13 BC
5587 Siouxland VC 13-National 1705 25-12 68% 13 IA
5588 REPUBLIC VC 14-1 1705 35-17 66% 14 TX
5589 SAND 16-Gold 1705 21-18 54% 16 UT
5590 Synergy 13 Ignite 1705 33-22 60% 13 CA
5591 HOV 13 Navy 1705 32-6 84% 13 VA
5592 TVC 14-Black 1705 25-32 44% 14 OH
5593 E SOLID ROCK 12 CARDINAL 1705 17-5 77% 12 TX
5594 CSVB 12-Blue 1705 20-6 77% 12 WI
5595 FORZA1 NORTH 13 National 1705 30-17 64% 13 CA
5596 The RIDGE 14-Blue 1705 24-4 86% 14 AR
5597 Aces 12-Purple 1705 11-1 92% 12 TX
5598 Notorious 14-Emily 1705 16-1 94% 14 CA
5599 Cheetah West 16 1705 10-1 91% 16 NY
5600 MODE 14 National 1705 35-20 64% 14 WA
← Previous1234567891011121314151617181920Next →

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.