Youth Club Girls Volleyball Team Rankings

2025-2026 Season — Page 51 · 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
2501 TopFlight 18-National bl 1828 10-4 71% 18 NV
2502 Academy North 12 National 1828 22-22 50% 12 CA
2503 NorthShore 13-Hamilton 1828 35-6 85% 13 OH
2504 C1VB 15-One grvl 1828 45-14 76% 15 SC
2505 AVA 15-Elite 1828 32-23 58% 15 NY
2506 Big Sky 14-John 1828 12-9 55% 14 MT
2507 DACAN 14-1 spirit 1828 5-2 71% 14
2508 KEVC 14-1 1827 35-19 65% 14
2509 I AM VBC 14-Red 1827 55-24 70% 14 WI
2510 KC Power 13-2 1827 36-18 67% 13 KS
2511 Ama 212 16-Heat 1827 34-9 79% 16 TX
2512 CHAVC 16-Black 1827 34-34 50% 16 NC
2513 CVH SELECT 18-1 1827 12-8 60% 18 PR
2514 Goldenwest 15 Asics 1827 40-16 71% 15 CA
2515 Tampa North 18-Black 1827 18-24 43% 18 FL
2516 1st Alliance 15-Grey 1827 48-10 83% 15 IL
2517 Texas One 16-Royal 1827 39-14 74% 16 TX
2518 CVC 10-Black 1827 32-4 89% 10 OH
2519 Vaqueras 17-F ruben 1827 9-10 47% 17 PR
2520 Top Notch 15-Elite 1827 33-20 62% 15 IL
2521 PR Arsenal 14 1827 10-8 56% 14 PR
2522 ID Crush IF 15-Noah 1827 23-9 72% 15 UT
2523 SMASH 14-S 1827 36-33 52% 14 MA
2524 HP 16-1 1827 28-32 47% 16 MI
2525 Metro VBC 12-Pink 1827 37-24 61% 12 IN
2526 PVA 15-National 1827 35-14 71% 15 SC
2527 Club South 18-Black 1826 32-16 65% 18 WA
2528 Metro 17-Purple 1826 43-25 63% 17 DC
2529 SOL 12-1 1826 25-7 78% 12 TX
2530 ThunderVanbc 18-1 1826 7-1 88% 18 BC
2531 ESVBC 17-Warriors 1826 35-4 90% 17 MD
2532 HPSTL 11-Orange 1826 37-23 60% 11 MO
2533 USA SOUTH 16-Mizuno 1826 36-25 59% 16 FL
2534 Iowa United 16-Elite timmerman 1826 6-1 86% 16 IA
2535 CVC 14-Navy 1826 54-21 68% 14 ND
2536 New WaveS 16-Franky 1826 35-6 85% 16 FL
2537 AVC 14-Blue 1826 18-7 72% 14 VA
2538 RVC Sparks 17 1826 33-17 65% 17
2539 CC Force 14-1 crossfire 1825 38-13 75% 14 TX
2540 Madtown 12-1 national 1825 43-17 72% 12 WI
2541 Mizuno M1 16-1 1825 37-42 47% 16 MN
2542 Wisconsin Elite 17-Elite 1825 34-30 53% 17 WI
2543 PSVBA 14-Legacy 1 1825 61-26 70% 14 WA
2544 Sunshine 11-Firecrackers 1825 41-12 77% 11 CA
2545 ROCK Volleyball 14-Sky 1825 45-26 63% 14 WI
2546 SKY Elite 18-1 1825 44-14 76% 18 PA
2547 SVE 16-1 1825 48-22 69% 16 GA
2548 208 U12 Elite 1825 48-16 75% 12 WA
2549 KIVA 12-Black 1825 55-24 70% 12 KY
2550 Sports Academy VBC 18-Premier 1825 5-3 63% 18 CA
← 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.