Youth Club Girls Volleyball Team Rankings

2025-2026 Season — Page 40 · 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
1951 Miami Wave 16-Aqua 1872 56-29 66% 16 FL
1952 Mill City 17 1872 41-19 68% 17 MA
1953 USA South 13-Premier purp 1872 42-16 72% 13 FL
1954 SRS 14-Blue 1872 48-7 87% 14 SC
1955 407 15-Blue 1872 51-26 66% 15 FL
1956 SoCal VBC 14-Beacons 1872 26-21 55% 14 CA
1957 Mintonette Sports 12-1 1872 45-44 51% 12 OH
1958 BEV 16 Empire 1871 45-29 61% 16 NY
1959 Alliance 15-Red 1871 35-8 81% 15 TN
1960 Colorado Elite 17 Grizzly 1871 41-24 63% 17 CO
1961 Club One AZ 17Gold 1871 54-34 61% 17 AZ
1962 ECJVC 17-National 1871 39-30 57% 17 NC
1963 MIDTN 14-BLACK 1871 21-11 66% 14 TN
1964 Victorium 14 UA 1871 36-34 51% 14 AZ
1965 Mizuno CNVBC 17-Jessen 1871 29-18 62% 17 MO
1966 NLVC 17-National 1871 39-14 74% 17 NJ
1967 Texas Tornados 15-Adidas 1871 33-20 62% 15 TX
1968 Iowa Impact 15-1 elite 1871 44-25 64% 15 IA
1969 Colorado Juniors 16-Bri 1871 19-6 76% 16 CO
1970 Hunter's 12-Black 1871 63-13 83% 12 FL
1971 A5 Chattanooga 17-1 1871 19-8 70% 17 TN
1972 TAV 16-Blue (NT) 1871 23-20 53% 16 TX
1973 Ignite 13 National (SC) 1871 22-15 59% 13 CA
1974 TX STORM 13-Smack 1870 35-16 67% 13 TX
1975 ECVC 16-Black 1870 36-27 57% 16 VA
1976 Monon 16-1o pegasus 1870 43-45 49% 16 IN
1977 NORCO 14-Black 1870 40-18 69% 14 CO
1978 NIVA 16-PURPLE 1870 63-36 64% 16 IN
1979 RISE 15-Jaden 1870 33-8 80% 15 CA
1980 PowerPlex 15-Mendieta 1870 33-24 58% 15 IA
1981 OT 16-T augusto 1870 51-17 75% 16 FL
1982 Academy 15 Crystal 1870 37-27 58% 15 NC
1983 Big Sky VB 16-1 1870 11-0 100% 16
1984 Ignite VBCF 13-National 1870 8-1 89% 13
1985 Yorktowne VB 14-Blue 1870 55-20 73% 14 PA
1986 Sideout 16-N cooper 1869 49-20 71% 16 NJ
1987 Texas Tornados 18-Adidas 1869 23-9 72% 18 TX
1988 Illini Elite 17-Black 1869 36-16 69% 17 IL
1989 Decatur Force 14 Teal 1869 33-10 77% 14 IN
1990 GP 10 National 1869 65-6 92% 10 FL
1991 Mindset Premier 17-Red 1869 36-13 73% 17 IL
1992 Katy United 14-Adidas 1869 52-19 73% 14 TX
1993 KUIKAHI 14-Wahine rsb 1869 19-13 59% 14 HI
1994 Lockdown VBC 15-Cardinals 1869 41-19 68% 15 MA
1995 WAVE 14-Nancy 1869 31-23 57% 14 CA
1996 Momentous VBC 14-Spencer 1869 26-23 53% 14 CA
1997 NorthShore 14 Crocs 1869 40-15 73% 14 MI
1998 MemphisVBAcademy 14-Red 1869 51-17 75% 14 MS
1999 Aspire 15 Premier 1868 50-24 68% 15 AB
2000 NKYVC 13-2 tide 1868 31-23 57% 13 KY
← 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.