2025-2026 Season — Page 37 · 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.
| # | Team | Elo | Record | Win% | Age | State |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1801 | Pgh Elite 17-Elite | 1887 | 33-30 | 52% | 17 | PA |
| 1802 | 1st Alliance 17 Onyx | 1887 | 45-12 | 79% | 17 | IL |
| 1803 | BONNEVILLE 16-Carl | 1887 | 29-16 | 64% | 16 | ID |
| 1804 | TAV 16-Blue (NT) | 1887 | 23-20 | 53% | 16 | TX |
| 1805 | ATOMIC 15-Smack premier | 1887 | 58-32 | 64% | 15 | AZ |
| 1806 | MiElite 18 Elite | 1887 | 29-20 | 59% | 18 | MI |
| 1807 | Happy Volley 15 Elite | 1887 | 34-13 | 72% | 15 | PA |
| 1808 | Epic United 15-Elite | 1887 | 35-26 | 57% | 15 | IL |
| 1809 | NRG VBC 15-Ampd navy | 1886 | 44-20 | 66% | 15 | TX |
| 1810 | Delaware United Volleyball Club 18-Navy | 1886 | 23-12 | 66% | 18 | DE |
| 1811 | FaR Out 16-Onyx | 1886 | 49-12 | 80% | 16 | MI |
| 1812 | Madfrog 12-N white | 1886 | 51-14 | 72% | 12 | TX |
| 1813 | Premier Nebraska 11-Gold | 1886 | 32-8 | 78% | 11 | NE |
| 1814 | 417 MoJrs 18 Elite | 1886 | 23-10 | 70% | 18 | MO |
| 1815 | Northern Lights 16-R | 1886 | 63-15 | 81% | 16 | MN |
| 1816 | Illini Elite 14-Cardinal | 1886 | 29-6 | 83% | 14 | IL |
| 1817 | Laredo JRS 14-1 navy | 1885 | 45-8 | 85% | 14 | TX |
| 1818 | Sanford Fargo 18-UA | 1885 | 38-23 | 62% | 18 | MN |
| 1819 | USA South 14-Premier purple | 1885 | 31-24 | 56% | 14 | FL |
| 1820 | GRIT 14-Premier -1 | 1885 | 36-7 | 84% | 14 | AL |
| 1821 | Coastal VBC 16 Navy | 1885 | 51-8 | 85% | 16 | DE |
| 1822 | TAV Houston 17-Black j | 1885 | 33-29 | 53% | 17 | TX |
| 1823 | 3DGE 16-1 gold | 1885 | 21-26 | 45% | 16 | PA |
| 1824 | Top Select 18 Elite | 1885 | 36-15 | 71% | 18 | FL |
| 1825 | SMASH 18-2 | 1885 | 7-1 | 88% | 18 | MA |
| 1826 | Dallas Skyline 17-Black | 1884 | 26-14 | 63% | 17 | TX |
| 1827 | Fusion 18-Blue | 1884 | 35-12 | 74% | 18 | PA |
| 1828 | RCVC 13-Unite | 1884 | 26-1 | 96% | 13 | NC |
| 1829 | Bama Elite 16-E spartans | 1884 | 39-16 | 71% | 16 | AL |
| 1830 | Top Caliber 14-Nicole | 1884 | 58-10 | 85% | 14 | NC |
| 1831 | Aspire NW 15-1 beaverton | 1883 | 44-20 | 69% | 15 | OR |
| 1832 | Lex United 17 Elite | 1883 | 76-68 | 53% | 17 | KY |
| 1833 | Club Fusion 16-1 national | 1883 | 34-21 | 62% | 16 | IL |
| 1834 | VolleyFX 17 Rapture | 1883 | 37-28 | 56% | 17 | NY |
| 1835 | Arete 17-Navy ethos | 1883 | 34-13 | 71% | 17 | TX |
| 1836 | Athlete HQ 12-Burger | 1883 | 36-9 | 80% | 12 | OH |
| 1837 | PSVC 15-Maya | 1883 | 46-14 | 77% | 15 | SC |
| 1838 | Surfside 16-Pv elite | 1883 | 38-26 | 59% | 16 | CA |
| 1839 | OT 12-T liz | 1883 | 45-23 | 66% | 12 | FL |
| 1840 | WAVE 14-Nancy | 1883 | 31-23 | 57% | 14 | CA |
| 1841 | MOVSelect 14-Green | 1882 | 28-2 | 93% | 14 | OH |
| 1842 | NE Elite 16-Flames | 1882 | 26-13 | 67% | 16 | NE |
| 1843 | GSI 14-Green venice | 1882 | 17-13 | 57% | 14 | FL |
| 1844 | PSVC 13 Jamaica | 1882 | 35-17 | 67% | 13 | SC |
| 1845 | Vision 13-Blue | 1882 | 40-22 | 65% | 13 | CA |
| 1846 | Goldenwest Volleyball Club 16-Asics | 1882 | 36-21 | 63% | 16 | CA |
| 1847 | NorthEast Volleyball Club 15-2 | 1882 | 50-11 | 82% | 15 | CT |
| 1848 | CIA 16-Black | 1882 | 43-15 | 73% | 16 | IA |
| 1849 | ECJVC 17-National | 1882 | 39-30 | 57% | 17 | NC |
| 1850 | AP 14-Baden | 1882 | 40-31 | 56% | 14 | TX |
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.