Youth Club Girls Volleyball Team Rankings

2025-2026 Season — Page 6 · 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
251 MKE Sting 14-Black 2191 66-22 75% 14 WI
252 Premier Nebraska 18 Gold 2191 28-4 88% 18 NE
253 KC Power 18-1 2191 31-12 72% 18 KS
254 PEAK 13-1 elite 2191 42-16 72% 13 OK
255 VCNebraska 14-Elite 2191 25-12 68% 14 NE
256 NKYVC 15-1 tsunami 2189 44-33 57% 15 KY
257 South County 15-Darice 2188 53-15 78% 15 UT
258 AZ Sky 15 Gold 2187 60-26 70% 15 AZ
259 SG Elite 16 Roshambo 2187 45-23 66% 16 CA
260 SC Elite 15-Blue-jake 2186 57-17 77% 15 SC
261 AJV 17-Adidas 2186 46-23 67% 17 TX
262 MADFROG 15-N black 2186 56-17 77% 15 TX
263 OK Charge 17-Ua 2186 33-25 57% 17 OK
264 FaR Out 16-Black 2185 39-29 57% 16 MI
265 Mintonette Sports 14-1 2184 40-33 55% 14 OH
266 IMGA Ascender Elite 18-1 2184 46-12 79% 18 FL
267 Elevation 13-Molly 2183 34-19 64% 13 OH
268 Panda 13-1 2182 64-16 80% 13 CA
269 OPU 15-1 2182 62-14 82% 15 FL
270 Miami Hype 17-Prime1 2180 47-26 64% 17 FL
271 A5 17 AG 2180 41-19 68% 17 GA
272 1st Alliance 16-Silver 2180 51-16 76% 16 IL
273 AZ REV 14 Premier 2178 78-50 61% 14 AZ
274 FaR Out 18-Black 2178 37-9 80% 18 MI
275 CVC 15-Black 2178 39-33 54% 15 OH
276 VVA 16-Rosen 2177 55-19 74% 16 CA
277 KC Power 13-1 2177 39-26 60% 13 KS
278 EXCEL 11-Red 2177 15-1 94% 11 TX
279 OPU 14-1 2176 61-19 76% 14 FL
280 H Skyline 17-Royal 2176 33-33 50% 17 TX
281 COAST 16-1 nilay 2176 37-30 55% 16 CA
282 Monon 14-1o nova 2176 57-27 68% 14 IN
283 Arete 16-Navy telos 2175 43-24 64% 16 TX
284 Premier Nebraska 17 Gold 2175 41-19 68% 17 NE
285 MPV 17-National green 2174 80-17 82% 17 UT
286 AVC CLE 15-Red 2174 50-21 70% 15 OH
287 Wildfire 13-N lee ann 2173 52-29 64% 13 FL
288 MKE Sting 18 Gold 2173 31-20 61% 18 WI
289 EXCEL 12-National red 2173 54-13 81% 12 TX
290 Stars 17 ALex 2173 57-21 73% 17 SC
291 HPSTL 12 Royal 2172 66-12 85% 12 MO
292 Northern Lights 15-1 2172 48-36 57% 15 MN
293 1st Alliance 15 Silver 2170 54-16 77% 15 IL
294 Pohaku 18-1 2170 34-18 65% 18 KS
295 Paramount VBC 15 Nick 2169 55-29 65% 15 VA
296 Dal Skyline 17-Royal-sean 2169 41-24 62% 17 TX
297 VCNebraska 16 Elite 2169 26-25 51% 16 NE
298 CJV 16-Mizuno 2169 45-22 67% 16 NC
299 Dal Skyline 14-Royal-josh 2168 54-22 71% 14 TX
300 Circle City 18-Purple 2168 46-20 70% 18 IN
← Previous123456789Next →

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.