2025-2026 Season — Page 39 · 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1901 | Absolute 17-Pink | 1878 | 43-24 | 64% | 17 | CA |
| 1902 | Platform 17-Adidas | 1877 | 52-30 | 63% | 17 | IA |
| 1903 | Southwest 14-N ashley | 1877 | 37-30 | 55% | 14 | OH |
| 1904 | AVC CLE 14-Red | 1877 | 25-33 | 43% | 14 | OH |
| 1905 | NKYVC 13-2 tide | 1877 | 31-23 | 57% | 13 | KY |
| 1906 | AVC 15-1 (NT) | 1877 | 16-8 | 67% | 15 | TX |
| 1907 | VVB 15-Alfie | 1877 | 47-16 | 75% | 15 | GA |
| 1908 | Alliance 15-Red | 1876 | 35-8 | 81% | 15 | CA |
| 1909 | Circle City 11-Purple | 1876 | 50-16 | 76% | 11 | IN |
| 1910 | MemphisVBAcademy 13-Red | 1876 | 43-20 | 68% | 13 | MS |
| 1911 | A5 14-3 kip | 1876 | 6-1 | 86% | 14 | GA |
| 1912 | H Skyline 16-White | 1876 | 47-17 | 73% | 16 | TX |
| 1913 | Top Select 15-Top white | 1876 | 66-10 | 87% | 15 | FL |
| 1914 | NIVA 14-PURPLE | 1876 | 51-27 | 65% | 14 | IN |
| 1915 | NIVA 16-PURPLE | 1876 | 63-36 | 64% | 16 | IN |
| 1916 | Michigan Volleyball Academy 14 MVA - Rise Academy 41 (LK) | 1876 | 30-17 | 64% | 14 | MI |
| 1917 | MINOI 17-Black | 1876 | 47-20 | 70% | 17 | UT |
| 1918 | Iowa Rockets 15-R | 1875 | 45-27 | 63% | 15 | IA |
| 1919 | Colorado Elite 17 Grizzly | 1875 | 41-24 | 63% | 17 | CO |
| 1920 | BVC 16 Casie | 1875 | 51-18 | 74% | 16 | CA |
| 1921 | GCVC 13 Silver | 1875 | 38-19 | 67% | 13 | OH |
| 1922 | AVA 14-Elite | 1875 | 33-11 | 75% | 14 | NY |
| 1923 | OVA 14-Black | 1875 | 64-24 | 73% | 14 | FL |
| 1924 | Idaho ONE 14-White | 1875 | 51-8 | 84% | 14 | ID |
| 1925 | FAV 16 Maverick | 1875 | 23-2 | 92% | 16 | CA |
| 1926 | EVA 16-Elite | 1875 | 47-21 | 68% | 16 | AR |
| 1927 | Madison 16-Sebastion | 1875 | 13-9 | 59% | 16 | UT |
| 1928 | Junior BIsons 16-Gold | 1875 | 4-5 | 44% | 16 | KY |
| 1929 | Texas Tornados 15-Adidas | 1875 | 33-20 | 62% | 15 | TX |
| 1930 | Iowa Impact 15-1 elite | 1875 | 44-25 | 64% | 15 | IA |
| 1931 | Hunter's 12-Black | 1875 | 63-13 | 83% | 12 | FL |
| 1932 | Mintonette Sports 12-1 | 1875 | 45-44 | 51% | 12 | OH |
| 1933 | RISE 15-Jaden | 1875 | 33-8 | 80% | 15 | LA |
| 1934 | PowerPlex 15-Mendieta | 1875 | 38-25 | 60% | 15 | IA |
| 1935 | TAV 15-Blue (NT) | 1875 | 34-22 | 56% | 15 | TX |
| 1936 | Mizuno CNVBC 17-Jessen | 1875 | 29-18 | 62% | 17 | MO |
| 1937 | AZ SKY 15-Blue | 1875 | 48-34 | 59% | 15 | AZ |
| 1938 | Durham Rebels Volleyball Club 17 Durham Rebels Blockade | 1875 | 12-3 | 80% | 17 | ON |
| 1939 | HVC Shoji 16 | 1874 | 33-9 | 79% | 16 | HI |
| 1940 | 575 15-Lpe russell | 1874 | 43-28 | 61% | 15 | GA |
| 1941 | Lockdown VBC 15-Cardinals | 1874 | 41-19 | 68% | 15 | MA |
| 1942 | AZ EVJ 15 Elite | 1874 | 42-37 | 53% | 15 | AZ |
| 1943 | Buckeyefire 16-1 | 1874 | 57-7 | 89% | 16 | OH |
| 1944 | Club One AZ 17Gold | 1874 | 54-34 | 61% | 17 | AZ |
| 1945 | Big Sky 17-1 | 1874 | 31-14 | 67% | 17 | MT |
| 1946 | FSJ 13 Elite | 1874 | 39-13 | 75% | 13 | AR |
| 1947 | Kairos 14 Gamma | 1874 | 41-16 | 72% | 14 | SD |
| 1948 | ECVC 16-Black | 1874 | 36-27 | 57% | 16 | VA |
| 1949 | OPVC 14-Horton | 1874 | 40-24 | 63% | 14 | OH |
| 1950 | Tribe 13-Elite navy | 1874 | 41-18 | 69% | 13 | FL |
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.