Youth Club Girls Volleyball Team Rankings

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 2630 Elo rating and 80-6 record. Rankings reflect the 2025-2026 season and are based on over 500,000 tracked matches.

Run a club? Your club is already listed here with its teams, results and ranking. Claim it free to fix the details and add the verified badge.
What claiming gets you →
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
1851 K1 Bayamon 15-David 1882 3-5 38% 15 PR
1852 HRVC Hurricanes 15-1 1882 7-6 54% 15 ON
1853 COVC 18 Nationals 1881 22-13 63% 18 OR
1854 407 17-Orange 1881 48-40 55% 17 FL
1855 OT 16-T augusto 1881 51-17 75% 16 FL
1856 CJV 13 National 1881 55-9 86% 13 AR
1857 WAVE 14-Haley 1881 27-12 69% 14 CA
1858 KUIKAHI 14-Wahine rsb 1881 19-13 59% 14 HI
1859 MVC 16 Danny 1881 41-18 69% 16 OH
1860 VIPER 14 Elite 1881 49-15 77% 14 TN
1861 Prodigy 15-1 premier 1881 58-16 78% 15 NY
1862 SynergyForce 15-2 natl 1881 42-31 58% 15 CA
1863 MichioChicago 14-Bluesmoke 1881 25-21 54% 14 IL
1864 Millennium 14-W/b 1880 44-7 86% 14 OH
1865 Jupiter Elite 16-E 1880 18-43 30% 16 FL
1866 Legacy 11-1 adidas 1880 50-13 79% 11 MI
1867 Legacy 15-3 adidas 1880 44-21 68% 15 MI
1868 208 16-Elite 1880 27-29 48% 16 ID
1869 EMV 13-National black mcneider 1880 6-2 75% 13 TX
1870 NorCal 13-2 blue 1880 48-30 62% 13 CA
1871 Tulsa Power 16-1 1880 44-17 71% 16 OK
1872 Midwest Elite 16-1 1880 16-8 67% 16 NE
1873 PSVA 14-1 1880 50-22 69% 14 FL
1874 Pursuit 17-National 1879 39-27 59% 17 MO
1875 Angelo Rise 15-1 1879 40-10 80% 15 TX
1876 LA6 12 1879 41-4 91% 12 LA
1877 Michigan Volleyball Academy 16 MVA - Rise Academy 62 1879 28-26 52% 16 MI
1878 RRHEATVB 17-1 jaz 1879 28-18 61% 17 UT
1879 PV Slammers 12 1879 65-24 68% 12 IA
1880 UPONTOP 14-S elite 1879 43-30 59% 14 FL
1881 Elite 17-National cd 1879 40-23 63% 17 FL
1882 VVB 18-Marj 1879 31-6 84% 18 GA
1883 LIBERO 16 HUSKIES 1878 75-38 66% 16 VA
1884 Blue Ridge 14-Orange 1878 44-7 86% 14 VA
1885 Ka Ulukoa 14 James 1878 17-6 74% 14 HI
1886 Academy 15 Crystal 1878 37-27 58% 15 NC
1887 TX LEGACY 12-Elite 1878 59-15 80% 12 TX
1888 Club V Cache Valley 15 1878 14-15 48% 15 UT
1889 MKE Sting 16 Silver 1878 66-21 76% 16 WI
1890 USA South 13-Premier purp 1878 42-16 72% 13 FL
1891 EXCEL 17-National white 1878 29-23 55% 17 TX
1892 Premier 14-Black aj 1878 29-11 69% 14 TX
1893 Rancho 16 Premier 1878 37-31 54% 16 CA
1894 Netforce 17-Saige 1878 34-7 83% 17 AL
1895 Ultimate VBC 18-Gold 1878 4-4 50% 18 IL
1896 Tstreet SN 15-Jackson 1878 31-13 70% 15 NV
1897 VC United 16-1 elite 1878 24-26 48% 16 IL
1898 SMASH 18-S 1878 15-10 60% 18 MA
1899 Premier 15 Trabuco 1878 59-18 77% 15 OH
1900 Wildfire 17-N travis 1878 29-22 57% 17 FL
← 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.