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 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
51 Metro 15 Travel 2376 70-11 86% 15 DC
52 DYNASTY 16-Black 2375 54-16 77% 16 KS
53 Tribe 16-Vktry cardinal 2371 57-20 74% 16 FL
54 Dallas Skyline 13-Royal 2371 51-6 88% 13 TX
55 1st Alliance 14-1 2370 54-13 81% 14 IL
56 Nebraska ONE 17 Synergy 2369 45-11 80% 17 NE
57 AZ Sky 14 Gold 2368 57-31 65% 14 AZ
58 1st Alliance 16-Gold 2368 46-18 72% 16 IL
59 Vision 17 Gold 2364 70-19 79% 17 CA
60 GP 14 National 2362 74-34 69% 14 FL
61 MAVS 14-Elite 2361 43-17 72% 14 KS
62 FaR Out 14-Black 2359 59-15 80% 14 MI
63 DYNASTY 13-Black 2356 63-11 85% 13 KS
64 A5 17-Calvin 2355 49-34 59% 17 GA
65 WAVE 14-Juliana 2354 45-9 83% 14 CA
66 WAVE 17-Juliana 2354 50-13 79% 17 CA
67 A5 15-Kelly 2353 60-25 71% 15 GA
68 BSVBC 16-Black 2353 55-11 83% 16 IL
69 HJV 16-Elite 2351 51-23 69% 16 TX
70 MKE Sting 16-Gold 2350 57-26 69% 16 WI
71 TAV 18-Black jason 2350 50-5 91% 18 TX
72 Munciana 17-Samurai 2347 16-4 80% 17 IN
73 H Skyline 14-Royal 2345 41-30 58% 14 TX
74 MN Select 17-1 2338 58-14 81% 17 MN
75 Club Sand 15-Leão 2338 67-18 79% 15 UT
76 AP 17-Adidas 2336 42-20 68% 17 TX
77 MADFROG 14-N green 2335 61-14 81% 14 TX
78 Metro 16-Travel 2331 60-15 80% 16 DC
79 Arete 13-Navy telos 2330 57-9 86% 13 TX
80 FaR Out 15-Black 2330 54-19 74% 15 MI
81 AZ REV 17 Premier 2329 55-22 71% 17 AZ
82 ARIZONA STORM 14 THUNDER 2327 53-26 67% 14 AZ
83 TAV Houston 16-Black 2326 48-22 69% 16 TX
84 1st Alliance 17-Gold 2326 42-18 70% 17 IL
85 Elevation 15-Ed 2326 39-18 68% 15 OH
86 KC Power 17-1 2325 37-13 74% 17 KS
87 HJV 17-Elite 2321 44-33 57% 17 TX
88 1United 14-N blue 2320 46-17 73% 14 TX
89 D Skyline 15-Royal-david 2319 50-21 70% 15 TX
90 Metro 17-Travel 2318 58-18 76% 17 DC
91 Legacy 16-1 adidas 2316 51-24 68% 16 MI
92 Vision 14-Gold 2315 46-21 69% 14 CA
93 South County 16-Nina 2315 44-25 64% 16 RI
94 Iowa Premier 16-1 2315 51-27 65% 16
95 Top Select 17 Elite 2313 59-19 76% 17 FL
96 Circle City 13-Purple 2312 69-12 85% 13 IN
97 Rockwood Thunder 15-Elite 2312 59-23 71% 15 MO
98 Northern Lights 16-1 2312 60-30 67% 16 MN
99 CVC 13-Black 2311 54-14 79% 13 OH
100 Paramount VBC 16 Maureen 2310 62-15 81% 16 VA
← 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.