Youth Club Girls Volleyball Team Rankings

2025-2026 Season — Page 28 · 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
1351 KIVA 16-Black 1935 57-27 68% 16 KY
1352 X TEAM 12-Warriors 1935 44-5 90% 12 CA
1353 NLVA 15-1 gold 1935 38-18 68% 15 NC
1354 FRVBC 18-1 black 1935 28-14 67% 18 CO
1355 Happy Volley Academy 16-1 1935 6-2 75% 16 PA
1356 Legacy 16-3 adidas 1934 62-22 74% 16 MI
1357 Tsunami 18-1e lane 1934 46-15 75% 18 GA
1358 Mem Metro 18 Masters 1934 35-11 76% 18 TN
1359 Ka Ulukoa 14 Tanya 1934 35-11 76% 14 HI
1360 Yorktowne VB 15-Blue 1934 59-22 73% 15 PA
1361 Madtown 15-1 national 1934 27-33 45% 15 WI
1362 UNION 14-Black 1934 44-36 55% 14 IN
1363 Northern Lights 15-B 1934 55-19 74% 15 MN
1364 CVC 12-Black 1934 38-26 59% 12 OH
1365 OK Charge 11-Ua 1934 42-8 84% 11 OK
1366 Dallas Premier 15-Black taly 1934 7-3 70% 15 TX
1367 NOLA Julie/Lauren/Sam 16 1934 115-70 62% 16 LA
1368 MiElite 14-Elite 1934 29-19 60% 14 MI
1369 Triad Elite 18 National 1934 32-17 65% 18 NC
1370 CUVC 17-Premier 1934 38-29 57% 17 NC
1371 Club Cactus 15-Mizuno 1933 42-32 57% 15 AZ
1372 RockCity 15 N1 1933 33-32 51% 15 OH
1373 South Central NE 13-Black 1933 29-5 85% 13 NE
1374 Rampage 16-S black 1933 56-31 64% 16 UT
1375 863 Elite 15-1 black 1933 49-12 80% 15 FL
1376 SC Rockstar 14-Hawk 1933 37-19 66% 14 CA
1377 Amarillo Xtreme 17 LYT 1933 40-13 75% 17 TX
1378 KEVC 16-1 1933 40-13 75% 16 MN
1379 Ike Loa 14-Paki 1933 27-4 87% 14 HI
1380 NYC Juniors 15-National 1933 47-19 71% 15 NY
1381 SNVF 14-Blizzard 1932 47-23 67% 14 WA
1382 PJVBC 15 National 1932 54-15 78% 15 WA
1383 AZ REV 15 Elite 1932 43-25 63% 15 AZ
1384 TAV 17-Black haroun 1932 37-31 54% 17 TX
1385 MDJRS 15-Elite black 1932 51-39 55% 15 MD
1386 BCS Skyline H 15-Royal 1932 38-24 61% 15 TX
1387 ADREN 13-1 1931 58-5 92% 13 OH
1388 Tri-State Elite 16-White 1931 38-24 61% 16 KY
1389 Mizuno M1 17-1 1931 50-33 60% 17 MN
1390 Austin Skyline 18 Royal 1931 24-15 62% 18 TX
1391 MKE Sting 15-White 1931 60-27 69% 15 WI
1392 New WAVE 16 Tsunami 1931 33-16 67% 16 IL
1393 UEPA 17-D 1931 33-14 67% 17 TX
1394 Austin Skyline 13-Royal 1931 37-19 65% 13 TX
1395 VCNebraska 16-Black 1931 14-14 50% 16 NE
1396 USANY Fortitude 18-1 1931 34-11 76% 18 NY
1397 CCVB 18-1 1931 5-3 63% 18 IL
1398 Tstreet 15-Curtis 1931 33-28 54% 15 CA
1399 AZ Sky 17-Blue 1931 46-31 60% 17 AZ
1400 MVSA 17 Blaze 1931 49-22 69% 17 MD
← 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.