Subscription publishers traditionally require authors to sign a copyright transfer agreement (CTA). The CTA transfers copyright ownership from the author to the journal. Usually the agreement will specify certain non-exclusive rights that the authors retain.
Now, many publishers seem to be adopting license to publish (LtP) agreements. These agreements give the publisher the exclusive right to reproduce and publish the work. Functionally, an exclusive LtP seems equivalent to a CTA. A previous Q&A regarding the ACM, which let authors choose between a CTA and LtP, didn't identify any meaningful differences.
Without specifying any functional differences, some publishers have been advertising their LtPs as a more equitable arrangement than CTAs. For example, Science states:
As part of our mission, AAAS seeks to enhance communication among scientists, engineers, and the public, worldwide. Toward that end, AAAS does not require a copyright transfer from authors. Instead, authors are asked to grant AAAS an exclusive license to publish their work.
And Oxford University Press states (unclear whether this comment is juxtaposing LtPs with CTAs):
It is a condition of publication that authors grant an exclusive licence to Oxford Journals or the society of ownership. This ensures that requests from third parties to reproduce articles are handled efficiently and consistently, and will also allow the article to be as widely disseminated as possible.
As a content creator, is there anything preferable about granting a publisher an exclusive LtP rather than transferring copyright? Are there any differences?