Offline reinforcement learning (RL) algorithms can acquire effective policies by utilizing only previously collected experience, without any online interaction. While it is widely understood that offline RL is able to extract good policies even from highly suboptimal data, in practice offline RL is often used with data that resembles demonstrations. In this case, one can also use behavioral cloning (BC) algorithms, which mimic a subset of the dataset via supervised learning. It seems natural to ask: When should we prefer offline RL over BC? In this paper, our goal is to characterize environments and dataset compositions where offline RL leads to better performance than BC. In particular, we characterize the properties of environments that allow offline RL methods to perform better than BC methods even when only provided with expert data. Additionally, we show that policies trained on suboptimal data that is sufficiently noisy can attain better performance than even BC algorithms with expert data, especially on long-horizon problems. We validate our theoretical results via extensive experiments on both diagnostic and high-dimensional domains including robot manipulation, maze navigation, and Atari games when learning from a variety of data sources. We observe that modern offline RL methods trained on suboptimal, noisy data in sparse reward domains outperform cloning the expert data in several practical problems.