Youth Club Girls Volleyball Team Rankings

2025-2026 Season — Page 22 · 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
1051 Big Sky 16-1 1979 32-20 62% 16 MT
1052 Jammers 14-Kalepa 1979 46-13 78% 14 HI
1053 Club V 15-Prodigy steph 1979 23-24 49% 15 UT
1054 OMNI 16 Elite 1979 49-31 61% 16 CA
1055 Stars 14-Bb 1979 58-10 85% 14 SC
1056 GVA 15-Pink 1979 26-9 74% 15 PR
1057 Dead Frog 15-Black 1979 34-19 64% 15 MI
1058 Roots 16-1 green 1978 41-20 67% 16 IA
1059 LAV 17-National black 1978 40-20 67% 17 AL
1060 Ignite 16-Nationals 1978 16-7 70% 16 TX
1061 UEPA 18-D 1977 47-7 85% 18 TX
1062 Level Up 14-1 1977 46-10 82% 14 CA
1063 FORZA1 NORTH 12-One 1977 33-14 70% 12 CA
1064 A5 17-Acevedo 1977 28-7 80% 17 GA
1065 AZ SKY 18-Blue 1976 46-23 67% 18 AZ
1066 WPVC 12-Armour black 1976 54-22 71% 12 FL
1067 Cape Coast 13-Columbia 1976 43-14 75% 13 FL
1068 ARVC 13-Orange 1975 48-9 84% 13 NC
1069 Decatur Force 13 Teal 1975 51-14 78% 13 IN
1070 MADFROG 16-N black cj 1975 42-25 62% 16 TX
1071 Metro 15 National 1975 46-25 64% 15 DC
1072 Yorktown 14 1975 31-4 89% 14 IN
1073 NE Elite 14-Koa 1975 30-11 73% 14 NE
1074 I AM VBC 13-Red 1975 63-17 79% 13 WI
1075 Elevation 18 Peak 1974 27-14 66% 18 CO
1076 DYNASTY 13-Blue 1974 44-16 73% 13 KS
1077 Metro VBC 14-Pink 1974 43-21 67% 14 IN
1078 SMASH 16 1974 22-13 63% 16 MA
1079 417 MoJrs 16 Elite 1974 47-17 73% 16 MO
1080 Idaho ONE 16-Elite 1974 57-30 66% 16 ID
1081 Madfrog 18-N black sears 1974 35-20 64% 18 TX
1082 Tribe 18-Vktry cardinal 1973 30-23 57% 18 FL
1083 Idaho ONE 12-Elite 1973 53-20 73% 12 ID
1084 St. Joe Storm 14-1 1972 23-8 74% 14
1085 A5 16-Danielle 1972 70-22 76% 16 GA
1086 VAQUERAS 16-F heyner 1972 31-6 84% 16 PR
1087 BORINQUEN COQUI 13-1f 1972 20-4 83% 13 PR
1088 BRUSA 18-William 1972 31-16 66% 18 CA
1089 SF Stars 14 1972 10-1 91% 14 CA
1090 Mintonette Sports 18-1 1972 34-28 54% 18 OH
1091 AP 12 adidas 1971 34-17 67% 12 TX
1092 Pohaku 13-1 1971 31-17 65% 13 KS
1093 Rhythm 18 Jeff 1971 30-13 70% 18 TN
1094 SG Elite 18-Roshambo 1971 34-19 64% 18 CA
1095 Emovol 13 1970 9-7 56% 13
1096 TXP 14-Black aaron 1970 42-17 70% 14 TX
1097 Premier Nebraska 12-Gold 1970 28-18 61% 12 NE
1098 Lions Cityside 12-1 1970 42-12 78% 12 IL
1099 Metro VBC 16-Pink 1970 44-24 65% 16 IN
1100 ATOMIC 12-Smack premier 1969 71-16 82% 12 MI
← 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.