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 2626 Elo rating and 80-6 record. Rankings reflect the 2025-2026 season and are based on over 500,000 tracked matches.
| # | Team | Elo | Record | Win% | Age | State |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1351 | SMV 15-1 black | 1934 | 65-11 | 86% | 15 | MN |
| 1352 | Tribe 16-Vktry white | 1934 | 47-38 | 55% | 16 | FL |
| 1353 | HPSTL 16-Orange | 1934 | 47-30 | 61% | 16 | MO |
| 1354 | K1 Bayamon 13-9 | 1934 | 18-2 | 90% | 13 | PR |
| 1355 | 2026 Nola Dana/Melissa 13-S | 1934 | 42-13 | 76% | 13 | |
| 1356 | KC Power 14-2 | 1933 | 32-23 | 58% | 14 | KS |
| 1357 | Aspire NW 13-1 beaverton | 1933 | 36-21 | 63% | 13 | WA |
| 1358 | Tsunami 18-1e lane | 1933 | 46-15 | 75% | 18 | GA |
| 1359 | Triad Elite 18 National | 1933 | 32-17 | 65% | 18 | NC |
| 1360 | X TEAM 12-Warriors | 1933 | 44-5 | 90% | 12 | CA |
| 1361 | CVC 12-Black | 1933 | 38-26 | 59% | 12 | OH |
| 1362 | A5 Chattanooga 16-1 | 1933 | 37-26 | 59% | 16 | TN |
| 1363 | UEPA 17-D | 1933 | 33-14 | 67% | 17 | TX |
| 1364 | South Central NE 13-Black | 1932 | 29-5 | 85% | 13 | |
| 1365 | TPV 17-Maverick | 1932 | 33-35 | 49% | 17 | |
| 1366 | Austin Skyline 13-Royal | 1932 | 37-19 | 65% | 13 | TX |
| 1367 | Aspire NW 16-1 vancouver | 1932 | 16-2 | 89% | 16 | WA |
| 1368 | BORINQUEN COQUI 14-F arcangel | 1932 | 6-2 | 75% | 14 | PR |
| 1369 | River City Juniors 18-Navy | 1932 | 8-1 | 89% | 18 | |
| 1370 | CCVB 18-1 | 1932 | 5-3 | 63% | 18 | CA |
| 1371 | Austin Skyline 18 Royal | 1931 | 24-15 | 62% | 18 | TX |
| 1372 | OK Charge 11-Ua | 1931 | 42-8 | 84% | 11 | OK |
| 1373 | Club Fusion 17-1 national | 1931 | 30-25 | 55% | 17 | IL |
| 1374 | Academy North 15-National | 1931 | 34-19 | 64% | 15 | CA |
| 1375 | KIVA 18-Red | 1931 | 31-21 | 60% | 18 | KY |
| 1376 | Innerlight VC 16 GOLD | 1931 | 49-12 | 80% | 16 | TN |
| 1377 | 1United 16-N white | 1931 | 42-20 | 66% | 16 | TX |
| 1378 | PSVC 15-Jay | 1931 | 36-19 | 65% | 15 | SC |
| 1379 | TAV 17-Black haroun | 1931 | 37-31 | 54% | 17 | TX |
| 1380 | Aces 14-S | 1931 | 31-5 | 78% | 14 | TX |
| 1381 | Legacy 16-3 adidas | 1931 | 62-22 | 74% | 16 | MI |
| 1382 | Aspire NW 14-1 vancouver | 1931 | 15-2 | 88% | 14 | WA |
| 1383 | Blue Ridge 15-Blue | 1931 | 9-8 | 53% | 15 | VA |
| 1384 | Big Sky 14 Westside | 1930 | 41-13 | 73% | 14 | MT |
| 1385 | Madtown 15-1 national | 1930 | 27-33 | 45% | 15 | WI |
| 1386 | Mizuno M1 17-1 | 1930 | 50-33 | 60% | 17 | MN |
| 1387 | NLVC 14-National | 1930 | 42-9 | 82% | 14 | NJ |
| 1388 | PJVBC 15 National | 1930 | 54-15 | 78% | 15 | WA |
| 1389 | Tri-State Elite 16-White | 1930 | 38-24 | 61% | 16 | OH |
| 1390 | 1st Alliance 16-Red | 1930 | 41-14 | 75% | 16 | IL |
| 1391 | Sanford Fargo 15-Ua | 1930 | 45-15 | 75% | 15 | ND |
| 1392 | DN 15-Red | 1930 | 8-1 | 89% | 15 | TX |
| 1393 | HEAT 13-Red | 1929 | 51-8 | 85% | 13 | WI |
| 1394 | Club Cactus 15-Mizuno | 1929 | 42-32 | 57% | 15 | AZ |
| 1395 | FRVBC 18-1 black | 1929 | 28-14 | 67% | 18 | CO |
| 1396 | SIVBC 13 Cyclone | 1929 | 47-26 | 64% | 13 | WA |
| 1397 | Active 14-Red | 1929 | 49-10 | 83% | 14 | VA |
| 1398 | ADREN 13-1 | 1929 | 58-5 | 92% | 13 | OH |
| 1399 | Next Level 13-1 josue | 1929 | 24-12 | 67% | 13 | CA |
| 1400 | PSVBA 16-Legacy 1 | 1929 | 57-25 | 70% | 16 | WA |
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.