Youth Club Girls Volleyball Team Rankings

2025-2026 Season — Page 14 · 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 2630 Elo rating and 80-6 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 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
651 SA Juniors 17-Adidas 2058 43-34 56% 17 TX
652 Top Select 13 Elite 2058 54-30 64% 13 FL
653 AP 15 adidas 2057 37-33 53% 15 TX
654 K2 15 Elite 2057 43-41 51% 15 TN
655 Happy Volley 16-Blue 2057 51-18 74% 16 PA
656 Premier 17-Black g 2057 41-19 67% 17 TX
657 Austin Skyline 14-Royal 2057 52-39 57% 14 TX
658 OK PEAK 16-1 2057 15-3 83% 16 OK
659 Iowa Rockets 17-R 2057 55-26 67% 17 IA
660 HOU STELLAR 12-Elite 2056 39-10 80% 12 TX
661 H Skyline 16-Black 2056 28-33 46% 16 TX
662 MichioChicago 17-Bluesmoke 2056 32-27 54% 17 IL
663 Shockwave 17-Black 2056 23-17 57% 17 KS
664 Boiler Jrs 18-O gold 2055 45-17 73% 18 IN
665 3DGE 15-1 gold 2055 33-25 57% 15 PA
666 DNVB 15-Red 2055 8-2 80% 15 MA
667 Roots 14-1 green 2054 45-27 63% 14 TX
668 TKVBC 17-Outlaws elite 2054 55-24 70% 17 GA
669 Circle City 18-Black 2054 41-16 72% 18 IN
670 OT 18-Tony 2054 39-15 72% 18 FL
671 United 12-Evren 2054 8-0 100% 12 HI
672 VAQUE 14-1 2053 7-1 88% 14 PR
673 HPSTL 13-Orange 2052 58-20 73% 13 MO
674 1st Alliance 16-Black 2052 45-22 67% 16 IL
675 Absolute 12-Black 2052 47-13 78% 12 CA
676 MKE Sting 15-Black 2052 61-21 74% 15 WI
677 MINOI 14-Black 2052 51-9 85% 14 UT
678 Red Storm 17-National xi 2052 50-24 68% 17 LA
679 AVC 13-1 (NT) 2051 33-4 89% 13 TX
680 NE Elite 15-1 2051 4-5 44% 15 NE
681 1st Alliance 17-Black 2051 40-18 69% 17 IL
682 NorCal 15-1 black 2051 37-28 57% 15 CA
683 WPVC 18-Armour black 2050 31-16 66% 18 FL
684 Tulsa Power 14-1 2050 46-13 78% 14 OK
685 Elevation 15 Peak 2050 38-15 72% 15 CO
686 Legacy 17-2 adidas 2050 47-36 57% 17 MI
687 VCNebraska 15-Elite 2050 25-14 64% 15 NE
688 St. Pete 16-Teal 2050 79-25 76% 16 FL
689 Iowa Rockets 18-R 2049 30-12 71% 18 IA
690 Tulsa Power 13-1 2049 64-6 90% 13 OK
691 KIVA 14-White 2049 54-24 69% 14 KY
692 Paramount VBC 13 Walter 2048 51-23 68% 13 VA
693 A5 17-Gonzalez 2047 32-9 78% 17 GA
694 MVA 14-Freideman 2047 51-31 62% 14 FL
695 SPIRIT VBC 16-1 2047 31-27 53% 16 OH
696 Mintonette Sports 17-2 2047 55-25 69% 17 OH
697 Jupiter Elite 13-E 2046 44-21 68% 13 FL
698 Iowa Rockets 14-R 2046 50-28 64% 14 IA
699 Integrity 18-Intense blue 2046 35-6 85% 18 TX
700 Academy 15 Diamond 2046 35-29 55% 15 NC
← Previous1234567891011121314151617Next →

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.