Value vs Growth factor. The names may be misleading, value actually has the better expected long term returns.

Look for "blend" funds instead.

Or even better, don't look at S&P 500. Look for total market instead (S&P 500 is a subset of the US total market) and ideally pair it with an extra fund. Total market would give you exposure to the "small" compensated risk factor and adding ex-US would remove the "single country" uncompensated risk factor.

Edit: Typo

You know what a PB&J is?

Some folks hate jelly and only like PB. So they only buy PB.

Some folks hate PB and only like jelly. So they only buy jelly.

Some folks like PB&J... so they buy both PB and jelly.

PB and jelly can be VOOV and VOOG.

VOO is PB&J.

But what might be even better is just buying the entire supermarket.

And that's VTI/VTSAX

• value stocks are stocks that are considered inexpensive or somehow 'on sale', relative to tother stocks. when you buy a stock, the stock price may or may not reflect a fair value for the company. the stock might be $100 a share, but the company might be worth $80 a share of $120 a share. it's a bit like buying a used car. you look up the price in Kelly Blue Book to see if the seller's price is reasonable. value investing is basically trying to pay $50 for stocks that are actually worth $100.

• growth stocks are companies that are growing faster than others of their type, usually measured by revenues or profits. these stocks tend to be more 'expensive' than value stocks, more like paying $100 for a stock that's actually worth $90 today because you hope the fast growth will someday make up for overpaying today.

there's a place for both types of stocks, because they move in cycles where one type will dominate for a few years. but overall value stocks will tend to give the best long-term results.