2025-2026 Season — Page 38 · 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1851 | 417 MoJrs 18 Elite | 1881 | 23-10 | 70% | 18 | MO |
| 1852 | NorStar 17-1 | 1881 | 31-25 | 55% | 17 | CA |
| 1853 | Sideout 18-N elvis | 1881 | 34-16 | 68% | 18 | NJ |
| 1854 | MiElite 14-National | 1881 | 37-12 | 76% | 14 | MI |
| 1855 | FaR Out 14-Gold | 1881 | 32-15 | 68% | 14 | MI |
| 1856 | Momentum 16-A | 1881 | 9-0 | 100% | 16 | CO |
| 1857 | Legacy 11-1 adidas | 1881 | 50-13 | 79% | 11 | MI |
| 1858 | Club Legacy 16-Alpha | 1881 | 32-9 | 78% | 16 | NE |
| 1859 | K1 Bayamon 15-David | 1881 | 3-5 | 38% | 15 | PR |
| 1860 | Munciana Indy 14 Otters | 1881 | 32-33 | 49% | 14 | IN |
| 1861 | HEAT 10-Red | 1880 | 35-8 | 80% | 10 | TX |
| 1862 | CNVKC Mizuno 16-Mike | 1880 | 36-15 | 71% | 16 | MO |
| 1863 | MOVA 16-M | 1880 | 60-14 | 81% | 16 | OH |
| 1864 | Paramount VBC 12 Jasmine | 1880 | 19-3 | 86% | 12 | VA |
| 1865 | TLVC Waves 17-1 | 1880 | 27-4 | 87% | 17 | NC |
| 1866 | SNVF 14 LIGHTNING | 1880 | 41-18 | 69% | 14 | WA |
| 1867 | Ultimate VBC 18-Gold | 1880 | 4-4 | 50% | 18 | IL |
| 1868 | OPVC 14-Horton | 1880 | 40-24 | 63% | 14 | OH |
| 1869 | Tstreet SN 15-Jackson | 1880 | 31-13 | 70% | 15 | CA |
| 1870 | HRVC Hurricanes 15-1 | 1880 | 7-6 | 54% | 15 | ON |
| 1871 | MVVC G 12-Red | 1880 | 37-17 | 69% | 12 | CA |
| 1872 | Iowa Rockets 15-R | 1879 | 45-27 | 63% | 15 | IA |
| 1873 | Cape Coast 16 TITAN | 1879 | 26-34 | 43% | 16 | FL |
| 1874 | Gulfside 14-Prime | 1879 | 54-20 | 73% | 14 | FL |
| 1875 | Rancho Valley 18 Premier | 1879 | 10-5 | 67% | 18 | CA |
| 1876 | Pursuit 17-National | 1879 | 39-27 | 59% | 17 | MO |
| 1877 | Club V 16-Prodigy preston | 1879 | 43-25 | 63% | 16 | UT |
| 1878 | Elite 17-National cd | 1879 | 40-23 | 63% | 17 | FL |
| 1879 | EMV 13-National black mcneider | 1879 | 6-2 | 75% | 13 | TX |
| 1880 | Elite Alliance 16-1 | 1879 | 22-11 | 67% | 16 | SD |
| 1881 | FAV 16 Maverick | 1879 | 23-2 | 92% | 16 | CA |
| 1882 | Rancho 16 Premier | 1879 | 28-16 | 64% | 16 | CA |
| 1883 | Chicago Elite 17 Elite | 1878 | 41-18 | 69% | 17 | IL |
| 1884 | Fusion 18-Blue | 1878 | 35-12 | 74% | 18 | PA |
| 1885 | MKE Sting 16 Silver | 1878 | 66-21 | 76% | 16 | WI |
| 1886 | MiElite 18 Elite | 1878 | 29-20 | 59% | 18 | MI |
| 1887 | MJVA 17-Elite black | 1878 | 36-22 | 62% | 17 | TN |
| 1888 | OVA 14-Black | 1878 | 64-24 | 73% | 14 | FL |
| 1889 | Top Select 18 Elite | 1878 | 36-15 | 71% | 18 | FL |
| 1890 | 407 17-Orange | 1878 | 48-40 | 55% | 17 | FL |
| 1891 | Arete 17-Navy ethos | 1878 | 34-13 | 71% | 17 | TX |
| 1892 | Junior BIsons 16-Gold | 1877 | 4-5 | 44% | 16 | |
| 1893 | COVC 18 Nationals | 1877 | 22-13 | 63% | 18 | OR |
| 1894 | MVP 60450 16U Black | 1877 | 31-4 | 89% | 16 | IL |
| 1895 | NIVA 14-PURPLE | 1877 | 51-27 | 65% | 14 | IN |
| 1896 | Platform 17-Adidas | 1877 | 52-30 | 63% | 17 | IA |
| 1897 | SMASH 18-S | 1877 | 15-10 | 60% | 18 | MA |
| 1898 | AVC CLE 14-Red | 1877 | 25-33 | 43% | 14 | OH |
| 1899 | Madison 16-Sebastion | 1877 | 13-9 | 59% | 16 | CA |
| 1900 | SWMNVB 14-1 | 1876 | 31-8 | 79% | 14 |
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.