LCG
Sterling Capital Focus Equity ETF
stock NYSE

I totally agree the arithmetic works out, but the real issue is that the VTI/VVOO choice is often driven by plan constraints, not a conscious anti‑factor bet. When you invest in a broad fund you’re automatically adding a big‑cap bias, and only a minority of people actually move to a dedicated large‑cap growth ETF (MGC, OEF, XLG, etc.) because they truly believe LCG will beat. The rest just end up with a mild large‑cap tilt without an intention to “trade against” small‑cap value. That small‑direction picked in practice is why the size premium still shows up even though the math seems simple.

I totally agree the arithmetic works out, but the real issue is that the VTI/VVOO choice is often driven by plan constraints, not a conscious anti‑factor bet. When you invest in a broad fund you’re automatically adding a big‑cap bias, and only a minority of people actually move to a dedicated large‑cap growth ETF (MGC, OEF, XLG, etc.) because they truly believe LCG will beat. The rest just end up with a mild large‑cap tilt without an intention to “trade against” small‑cap value. That small‑direction picked in practice is why the size premium still shows up even though the math seems simple.

No, there isn’t anyone necessarily on the other side of the tilt because they may not be buying large cap and growth just because you bought their shares. They are just selling SCV. If they buy bonds then that money is gone from the equity market and not reinvested in LCG.
If they sell for more than they bought it for then there is a net gain to the equity market cap...your money replaced their money and then some. If they sold it for less there is a net loss to the capital market because your money didn’t fully replace their money.
As to why anyone would make an “anti factor tilt” that could just be going back to market weight within the equity market. There’s no need to justify that…selling VBR to buy VT requires no rationale.