Youth Club Girls Volleyball Team Rankings

2025-2026 Season — Page 99 · 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
4901 ZTV 16-1 select 1724 25-10 69% 16 MT
4902 Dunes 14-Black 1724 47-30 61% 14 IN
4903 Iowa Impact 16-1 premier 1724 26-12 68% 16 IA
4904 Advanced Ath 16-1 natl 1724 14-6 70% 16 TX
4905 Katy United 13-Adidas 1724 35-25 58% 13 TX
4906 GOLDENBULLS 17-G black 1724 8-7 53% 17 FL
4907 Northeast 15-Blue 1724 22-8 73% 15 CT
4908 C2 14-2 regional blue wes 1724 11-5 69% 14 TN
4909 FW Fire 12-Purple 1724 11-5 65% 12 TX
4910 Dead Frog 13-Devin 1724 6-0 100% 13 MI
4911 HEAT 14-National ryan 1724 21-9 70% 14 CA
4912 SVC 14-U tiger sharks 1724 31-10 76% 14 SC
4913 Top Flight 13-National bl 1724 13-9 59% 13 NV
4914 Northeast 18-2 1724 29-18 62% 18 CT
4915 TI Elite 13-Short season 1724 26-10 72% 13
4916 2026 Nola Julie/Briley 12-S 1724 25-9 74% 12
4917 Fairfield 14-Gold 1723 7-0 100% 14
4918 TOVC García 14 1723 9-10 47% 14
4919 Ne Jrs 18-Black 1723 12-7 63% 18
4920 Criollas 11-1 1723 17-2 89% 11 PR
4921 NorCal Supreme 14-Blue 1723 18-4 82% 14 CA
4922 Club One 18-Elite 1723 18-6 72% 18 HI
4923 Chi City Elite 18-1 1723 11-12 48% 18 IL
4924 AVA 14-N adams 1723 30-19 61% 14 OH
4925 AVB Fire 14-1 black 1723 30-13 70% 14 MN
4926 Piedmont VBC 16-Nike 1723 38-26 59% 16 NC
4927 Club Cactus 16-Silver 1723 30-12 71% 16 AZ
4928 CVC 12-Blue 1723 30-19 61% 12 OH
4929 Dynasty 15-Gray 1723 25-18 58% 15 KS
4930 Mindset Premier 13-Red 1723 37-17 69% 13 IL
4931 MN North 14-1 navy 1723 60-24 71% 14 MN
4932 SKEVA 16-Blue 1723 31-20 61% 16 KY
4933 SVC Summit 15-1 1723 30-6 83% 15 GA
4934 Elevation 18-Bp 1723 27-14 66% 18 OH
4935 Amarillo Xtreme 11-Intensity 1723 29-19 60% 11 TX
4936 Cincy Crush 13-1 1723 32-22 59% 13 OH
4937 RVBC 17-White 1723 31-6 84% 17 PA
4938 Trivolley 11-1trinidad 1723 11-6 65% 11 PR
4939 Club Four 16-Boost 1723 44-17 71% 16 IL
4940 ECVBA 14-1 1723 28-16 64% 14 CA
4941 Inside Out 15-Mizuno black 1723 23-19 55% 15 MI
4942 CUVC 11-Growl 1723 16-2 73% 11 NC
4943 adidas DYNASTY 14-4 1723 13-1 68% 14 KS
4944 Apex Volleyball Club 14-1 1723 5-1 71% 14 MO
4945 ESVC 18 1723 23-9 72% 18 AL
4946 Diggersz 12-Black-liz 1723 21-2 88% 12 IL
4947 Sandhills 15-Amber 1723 29-16 64% 15 NC
4948 FAV 17 Maverick 1723 31-13 70% 17 CA
4949 Performance Juniors 16-1 1723 58-18 76% 16 NY
4950 806 Volleyball Tammy 11-S 1723 17-3 85% 11 TX
← 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.