Youth Club Girls Volleyball Team Rankings

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 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
1801 Rio Grande Elite 18-1 1886 8-3 73% 18 TX
1802 WAVE 14-Haley 1886 27-12 69% 14 CA
1803 Aspire NW 15-1 vancouver 1886 16-7 70% 15 WA
1804 Elevation 16-Bouyer 1886 39-14 74% 16 OH
1805 Premier 13-Black r 1886 29-14 67% 13 TX
1806 City 15 Gold 1885 36-20 64% 15 CA
1807 VolleyFX 17 Rapture 1885 37-28 56% 17 NY
1808 Tulsa Power 16-1 1885 44-17 71% 16 OK
1809 Top Caliber 14-Nicole 1885 58-10 85% 14 NC
1810 Laredo JRS 14-1 navy 1885 45-8 85% 14 TX
1811 CIA 16-Black 1885 43-15 73% 16 IA
1812 Athlete HQ 12-Burger 1885 36-9 80% 12 OH
1813 AVA 14-Elite 1885 33-11 75% 14 NY
1814 Ignite 16 National (SC) 1885 36-20 64% 16 CA
1815 KEVC 17-1 1884 32-20 62% 17
1816 CJV 13 National 1884 55-9 86% 13 AR
1817 Delaware United 18-Navy 1884 23-12 66% 18 DE
1818 PSVC 13 Jamaica 1884 35-17 67% 13 SC
1819 GRIT 14-Premier -1 1884 36-7 84% 14 AL
1820 FaR Out 16-Onyx 1884 49-12 80% 16 MI
1821 Premier Nebraska 11-Gold 1884 32-8 78% 11 NE
1822 Mindset Premier 15-Red 1884 49-12 80% 15 IL
1823 SMASH 18-2 1884 7-1 88% 18 MA
1824 CCJ 18-1 1884 49-4 92% 18 AL
1825 Aspire NW 15-1 beaverton 1883 44-20 69% 15 WA
1826 Angelo Rise 16-1 1883 44-10 81% 16 TX
1827 CUVC 13 Open 1883 32-33 49% 13 NC
1828 BONNEVILLE 16-Carl 1883 29-16 64% 16 ID
1829 USA South 14-Premier purple 1883 31-24 56% 14 FL
1830 UVC 12-Evren/quillan 1883 30-12 71% 12 MA
1831 GSI 14-Green venice 1883 17-13 57% 14 FL
1832 Northeast 13-1 1883 37-19 66% 13 CT
1833 1United 15-N white 1883 39-12 75% 15 TX
1834 MVC 16 Danny 1883 41-18 69% 16 OH
1835 CoJrs 17-Tara/amy 1882 32-19 63% 17 CO
1836 Mobile Storm 18 National 1882 27-5 84% 18 AL
1837 PSVA 14-1 1882 50-22 69% 14 FL
1838 Seal Beach 16-Black 1882 38-25 60% 16 CA
1839 Tri-State Elite 15-White 1882 34-28 55% 15 OH
1840 Academy North 13-National 1882 42-30 58% 13 CA
1841 Actyve 17-Navy 1882 23-39 37% 17 CA
1842 Northeast 15-2 1882 50-11 82% 15 CT
1843 PSVC 15-Maya 1882 46-14 77% 15 SC
1844 Carolina Rogue 18-Black 1882 14-9 61% 18 SC
1845 BVC 15-National drennan 1882 45-15 75% 15 AL
1846 Illini Elite 14-Cardinal 1882 29-6 83% 14 IL
1847 LA6 12 1881 41-4 91% 12 LA
1848 AP 14-Baden 1881 40-31 56% 14 TX
1849 Goldenwest 16 Asics 1881 36-21 63% 16 CA
1850 TAV Houston 17-Black j 1881 33-29 53% 17 TX
← 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.