Youth Club Girls Volleyball Team Rankings

2025-2026 Season — Page 33 · 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
1601 FSJ 16-Elite 1908 45-12 75% 16 AR
1602 Club Sol 14-Teal 1907 46-30 61% 14
1603 STVA 12-1 eddie 1907 54-16 76% 12 TX
1604 RVC 18 National 1907 29-13 69% 18 VA
1605 Stars 15 Tinsley 1907 58-18 76% 15 SC
1606 Huskies 17-Premier 1907 9-7 56% 17 CT
1607 Red Rock 17-Michelle - walnut creek 1907 27-33 45% 17 CA
1608 Madfrog 12-N white 1907 45-10 79% 12 TX
1609 Elevation 11-Dawn 1907 22-7 73% 11 OH
1610 ACESH 16-1 1907 10-5 67% 16 HI
1611 CJV 13 Mizuno 1906 32-30 52% 13 NC
1612 MVSA 14 Force 1906 44-26 63% 14 MD
1613 Storm 15 Adidas 1906 43-20 68% 15 AR
1614 WPVC 13-Armour black 1905 40-37 52% 13 FL
1615 Mid-Mich ACES 17 National 1905 46-14 77% 17 MI
1616 New WAVE 15 Tsunami 1905 39-22 64% 15 IL
1617 OMNI 15-National 1905 27-41 40% 15 CA
1618 VVA 17-DeRuiter 1905 49-19 72% 17 CA
1619 VCNebraska 17-Black 1905 19-15 56% 17 NE
1620 KCV 14-National velez 1905 59-12 83% 14 TX
1621 Iowa Select 16-Mizuno 1905 46-28 62% 16 IA
1622 TORCH 17-Katie 1905 37-23 62% 17 CA
1623 NKJV 15-Blue 1905 32-29 52% 15 KY
1624 PV Slammers 12 1905 43-11 78% 12
1625 SVC 334 15-Sellers 1905 24-7 77% 15
1626 SynergyForce 14-1 natl 1905 39-33 54% 14 CA
1627 CinciVB Acad 18-1 1904 23-12 66% 18 OH
1628 Alliance 15-Molten 1904 33-23 59% 15 TN
1629 Chicago Elite 16 Elite 1904 42-27 61% 16 IL
1630 Balboa Bay 18-Blue 1904 31-17 65% 18 CA
1631 Munciana 17 Aztecs 1904 40-34 54% 17 IN
1632 MoCo MAVS 17-Red 1904 43-34 56% 17 TX
1633 NorStar 15-1 1904 33-23 59% 15 CA
1634 SoCal VBC 16-Beacons 1904 38-24 61% 16 CA
1635 Tsunami 13-1e jeff 1904 44-16 73% 13 GA
1636 A5 15-Brett 1904 47-33 59% 15 GA
1637 Jupiter Elite 17-E 1904 34-35 49% 17 FL
1638 Landshark 13-Black 1904 30-6 83% 13 KS
1639 FORZA1 NORTH 14-One 1904 28-18 61% 14 CA
1640 MiElite 14-Elite 1904 29-19 60% 14 MI
1641 Wildfire 18-N open 1904 9-12 43% 18 FL
1642 864 Elite 15-Matt 1904 50-6 89% 15 SC
1643 COAST 14-Andy 1904 5-3 63% 14 CA
1644 AAC 17-National 1903 56-12 82% 17 FL
1645 K2 17-1 elite 1903 36-35 51% 17 TN
1646 Illini Elite 16-Black 1903 47-26 64% 16 IL
1647 Elevation 16 Peak 1903 38-28 58% 16 CO
1648 MAVS KC 13 National 1903 26-14 65% 13 KS
1649 Tri-State Elite 14-White 1903 36-23 61% 14 OH
1650 Arsenal PR 12-Jason 1903 15-8 65% 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.