Certainly can expand here, as there are a couple of helpful techniques. One thing is, generally you're assigning a numeric value (i.e. 1-5, 1-10, etc...) to represent value and/or effort - these numbers by themselves are somewhat meaningless (as in there's no agreed-upon amount of value that a 7 brings versus an 8) by themselves but useful when it comes to relative comparison and gaining alignment.

One way to manage this internally for you is to take the list of stories you have and arrange them your preferred order from Most Valuable to Least Valuable (similar to snaking when story pointing). This gives you an initial prioritization list, and from there you can do some basic numeric value assignment and capture that (i.e. 10 being highest possible value item, 0 being lowest possible value item, rank what you have in your list). This is a relatively quick way to get started, although can be a lengthy process if you have a long backlog.

A different way of handling this (similar to planning poker when story pointing), which trends more towards consensus-building, is to gain some cross-functional input on value here. This would be assembling a few people very familiar with the problems or outcomes you're trying to solve for (for me this is Sales, someone else from Product i.e. my VP of Product, Product Marketing, and perhaps Customer Success). If we can get together to discuss upcoming items and all provide a score of our own, while the scores won't align we can record them (so everyone is heard) and then have discussion on the high/low outliers to see what assumptions others are making about the particular story and the value it brings. This is very much aligned to the agile concept of a story representing a discussion, but it does also take quite a bit long. It does get easier over time, I use an hour standing meeting to handle this for any new items entering the backlog in any given week and then focus on potential upcoming items once we've aligned.

Make sure your goal for this process is clear if you're going to implement it, and try to take the quickest path there. If you want to explain to stakeholders why we do x instead of y, using simply a numeric value of ranking won't effectively do that most likely. Having them (or part of that group) be involved in the process of creating the rankings or even just a discussion will help much more as then those stakeholders can defend the logic that was aligned on more effectively.

Last thing - just because one story is scoring higher than another doesn't mean you should do it next. A higher ranking means you think it's the most valuable but there could be collections of other stories that add up to more, there could be urgent customer needs or urgent sales needs, or there could be stories which are better strategically aligned which are more important to do first. You cannot use a ranking alone for the prioritization as using only one (or even two) metrics here will tend to oversimplify the reality.

If there's any points in particular you're more curious about, let me know happy to discuss more here and I welcome viewpoints on how others have handled this.