Youth Club Girls Volleyball Team Rankings

2025-2026 Season — Page 2 · 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
51 DYNASTY 15-Black 2377 54-17 76% 15 KS
52 Tribe 16-Vktry cardinal 2375 57-20 74% 16 FL
53 Nebraska ONE 17 Synergy 2373 45-11 80% 17 NE
54 Dallas Skyline 13-Royal 2373 51-6 88% 13 TX
55 AZ Sky 14 Gold 2373 57-31 65% 14 AZ
56 1st Alliance 16-Gold 2371 46-18 72% 16 IL
57 Vision 17 Gold 2370 70-19 79% 17 CA
58 GP 14 National 2365 74-34 69% 14 FL
59 FaR Out 14-Black 2364 59-15 80% 14 MI
60 MAVS 14-Elite 2363 43-17 72% 14 KS
61 WAVE 17-Juliana 2360 50-13 79% 17 CA
62 WAVE 14-Juliana 2358 45-9 83% 14 CA
63 BSVBC 16-Black 2357 55-11 83% 16 IL
64 A5 17-Calvin 2356 49-34 59% 17 GA
65 DYNASTY 13-Black 2355 63-11 85% 13 KS
66 HJV 16-Elite 2355 51-23 69% 16 TX
67 TAV 18-Black jason 2355 50-5 91% 18 TX
68 A5 15-Kelly 2355 60-25 71% 15 GA
69 SC Rockstar LOVB 18-Amir 2351 52-7 88% 18 CA
70 MKE Sting 16-Gold 2350 57-26 69% 16 WI
71 H Skyline 14-Royal 2347 41-30 58% 14 TX
72 MADFROG 14-N green 2345 61-14 81% 14 TX
73 AP 17-Adidas 2344 42-20 68% 17 TX
74 Club Sand 15-Leão 2340 67-18 79% 15 UT
75 Metro Volleyball Club 16-Travel 2339 67-16 81% 16 DC
76 MN Select 17-1 2337 58-14 81% 17 MN
77 Munciana 17-Samurai 2336 16-4 80% 17 IN
78 Arete 13-Navy telos 2334 57-9 86% 13 TX
79 AZ REV 17 Premier 2333 55-22 71% 17 AZ
80 FaR Out 15-Black 2332 54-19 74% 15 MI
81 1st Alliance 17-Gold 2331 42-18 70% 17 IL
82 KC Power 17-1 2331 37-13 74% 17 KS
83 ARIZONA STORM 14 THUNDER 2331 53-26 67% 14 AZ
84 TAV Houston 16-Black 2327 48-22 69% 16 TX
85 HJV 17-Elite 2326 44-33 57% 17 TX
86 Elevation 15-Ed 2325 39-18 68% 15 OH
87 Metro Volleyball Club 17-Travel 2321 58-18 76% 17 DC
88 Vision 14-Gold 2321 46-21 69% 14 CA
89 Iowa Premier 16-1 2321 51-27 65% 16 IA
90 Legacy 16-1 adidas 2320 51-24 68% 16 MI
91 Northern Lights 16-1 2319 64-31 67% 16 MN
92 D Skyline 15-Royal-david 2318 50-21 70% 15 TX
93 CVC 13-Black 2316 54-14 79% 13 OH
94 South County 16-Nina 2316 44-25 64% 16 UT
95 Top Select 17 Elite 2315 59-19 76% 17 FL
96 Paramount VBC 16 Maureen 2313 62-15 81% 16 VA
97 NPJ 18 Forefront 2312 66-6 92% 18 OR
98 Rockwood Thunder 15-Elite 2311 59-23 71% 15 MO
99 Circle City 13-Purple 2311 69-12 85% 13 IN
100 PVA 16 ELITE 2309 38-25 60% 16 MO
← Previous12345Next →

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.