Not much at the pure identity level, because the design is trying to make splitting one operator into many validator IDs a no-op if the underlying eligible base is the same. The check is the concentration envelope, it only gives more delegated weight when the covered eligible stake is actually broader, so a provider cannot just mint extra identities and expect more delegation room unless it really expands the base being covered. The baseline advantage over a simple pool is that routing happens off protocol-visible native base stake, not off whichever staking provider a user picked, so the provider choice leaks less into consensus power.