Youth Club Girls Volleyball Team Rankings

2025-2026 Season — Page 23 · 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
1101 Next Level 16-1 abner 1971 20-5 80% 16 PR
1102 All In 12 1971 65-16 80% 12 AZ
1103 WGVC 11-1 national 1971 70-7 91% 11 FL
1104 Drive Nation 16-Red 1971 25-17 60% 16 TX
1105 CMVBC 17-1 1971 24-9 73% 17 MO
1106 Idaho ONE 16-Elite 1970 57-30 66% 16 ID
1107 Alliance 16-Red 1970 49-15 77% 16 CA
1108 Sunshine 13 Westside 1970 29-26 53% 13 CA
1109 I.C. Stars 16 Mark 1970 37-12 76% 16 NC
1110 AVC CLE 15-White 1969 41-23 64% 15 OH
1111 Big Sky 14-1 1969 59-22 71% 14 MT
1112 Munciana Indy 17 Cheetahs 1969 41-29 59% 17 IN
1113 Cape Coast 13-Columbia 1969 43-14 75% 13 FL
1114 AP 12 adidas 1969 37-21 64% 12 TX
1115 ATOMIC 12-Smack premier 1969 71-16 82% 12 AZ
1116 NE Elite 13-Nova 1968 20-18 53% 13 NE
1117 MKE Sting 13-Black 1968 57-27 68% 13 WI
1118 MISSION VOLLEYBALL 14-1 1968 31-15 67% 14 TX
1119 ARVC 16-Red adidas 1968 44-18 71% 16 NM
1120 FaR Out 17 Gold 1968 51-18 74% 17 MI
1121 Apex 14-National navy 1967 24-11 69% 14 MO
1122 MC 12-1 shepherd 1967 37-4 86% 12 MT
1123 Academy North 13-National 1967 75-58 56% 13 CA
1124 SA Elite 15-1 navy 1967 53-14 78% 15 TX
1125 Metro Volleyball Club 12-Travel 1967 50-16 76% 12 DC
1126 KCV 17 PREMIER 1967 66-13 84% 17 TX
1127 CoJrs 15-Candace 1967 48-23 68% 15 CO
1128 K2 18 Jota 1966 27-24 53% 18 TN
1129 I AM VBC 13-Red 1966 63-17 79% 13 WI
1130 FSJ 14-Elite 1966 46-15 75% 14 AR
1131 Six Pack 15 1966 63-20 74% 15 IA
1132 St. Pete 14-Teal 1966 68-21 76% 14 FL
1133 BCS Skyline H 16-Royal 1966 35-25 58% 16 TX
1134 Panda 16-1 1965 44-25 64% 16 CA
1135 Alabama Perf 17-N red 1965 28-31 47% 17 AL
1136 NKYVC 14-1 tsunami 1965 35-28 56% 14 KY
1137 Tsunami 16-1e marko 1965 40-20 67% 16 GA
1138 Madfrog 17-N black kallas 1965 31-18 62% 17 TX
1139 TAMPA UNITED VBA 14-Black 1965 48-26 65% 14 FL
1140 Iowa United 14-1 elite 1964 47-25 65% 14 IA
1141 PEAK 17-1 elite 1964 26-11 70% 17 OK
1142 KIVA 18-Red 1964 31-21 60% 18 KY
1143 DME Elite 18-1 1963 44-19 70% 18 FL
1144 Zona VBC 18-Black 1963 40-27 60% 18 AZ
1145 TXP 14-Black aaron 1963 42-17 70% 14 TX
1146 Alamo 11 Premier 1963 51-8 84% 11 TX
1147 Rancho 14-Premier 1963 38-15 72% 14 CA
1148 Blue Royals 16-Emerald 1963 54-16 77% 16 WA
1149 Miami Hype 13-Power 1962 10-3 77% 13 FL
1150 UVA 18 Matt 1962 53-16 77% 18 CA
← 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.