I'm not throwing shade at BG3; I've also enjoyed it, but something about the sheer amount of options and more widely diverging story paths in Wrath just does it more for me. I also like the art style more, but that's strictly subjective and I accept that.
To a lesser and more personal extent, I despise Wizards of the Coast/Hasbro and their recurring attempts to monopolize and bully third party game developers and players alike and I don't like to even indirectly trickle money their way compared to Paizo. Yes yes, no ethical consumption and all that, but Paizo's way less fucked up with both distributing game materials and open licensing agreements.
https://www.polygon.com/23553389/dnd-ogl-paizo-orc-open-rpg-creative-license-announcement
That's all I had to say. If you've already finished BG3 or it wasn't quite to your liking and you'd like an alternative, give Wrath a try. 
I love both of them, but they do make an interesting contrast.
BG3 has pretty much only unique fights — WOTR has a huge enemy variety problem
BG3 has companions that are all mostly just ok, carried by production values and great voice acting — WOTR has some companions that are really bad, but a few that are way better and more smartly written than BG3, that I still think about once in a while
BG3 combat starts pretty boring, as low-level dnd tends to be, but gets to be pretty great — WOTR combat starts really fun but becomes kind of a drag with the late-game enemy resistance bingo, performance problems, and some fights I could swear were not playtested once