Assalaamu 'aleykum
May I ask what evidence you have looked at to suggest that Shi'ism is more correct than Sunnism?
As a revert to Islam, I have tried to look at both sides with fairness (and I am continuing to try to learn), though granted my initial insight into Islam was from a Sunni perspective, I am still progressively concluding that the foundation of Shia beliefs to be a mixture of textual gymnastics to twist hadith and history to support their belief, fabricated lies (e.g. Umar - a beloved friend of the Prophet SAW whose daughter was married to him - caused Fatimah RA to misscarry a baby), and just really an appeal to emotions over logic and truth. If you look at the state of Shi'ism today, it doesn't take long to see that it is comprised of innovation and fanciful tales of the Ahlul Bayt attempting to secretly preserve Islam under persecution; Sunnis respect the Ahlul Bayt but there is no logical reason to prove why our deen is defined by them (or rather what was attributed to them in their name by extreme Shia living in hiding from persecution). If you look at Shi'ism today can you really honestly tell me that the way they practice Islam is how the Prophet SAW practiced it, and how the first generation of Muslims practiced it and believed it?
I will make a list of short topics and my judgements (if I was to post the evidence this post would be really long), but InshaAllah you will get the gist:
- Hadith of 12 Caliphs after the Prophet SAW - Did not refer to the Ahlul Bayt, and to refer to them would be greatly beyond the text of the hadith.
- Hadith of the two weighty things - The Hadith does not instruct Muslims to take their deen and leadership solely from the Ahlul Bayt, rather to be mindful and respectful.
- Hadith of Ali is your Mawla - Does not refer to Ali RA being the leader of the Muslims, and contrary to Shia beliefs this was not done in the presence of the majority of the Ummah, rather it was after an incident involving the Muslim army on their way back from Yemen.
- Hadith of the Pen - Did not indicate that the Sahabah (or Umar RA) prevented the Prophet SAW from writing Ali RA was his successor, and as Shia claim that Ali had already be publically declaired as the successor, this wouldn't make sense.
- The incident of choosing the Caliph - There is no authentic Sunni OR SHIA hadith which indicate that Umar RA caused Fatimah RA (the daughter of the Prophet SAW) to miscarry, and also history books do not even testify that she was pregnant at the time.
- Ali RA named his child after his 'enemy' (according to Shia) Abu Bakr which does not make sense.
- The hadith of Fatimah whoever angers Fatimah angers the Prophet SAW - This hadith was ironically stated when Ali RA expressed a desire to marry the daughter of Abu Lahab (the hated kafir uncle if the Prophet SAW), so do Shia believe Ali is hated by the Prophet SAW? Ofc they don't, so they are inconsistent.
- There were no chains of narration for Naghul Balagha - an 'authentic' Shia collection of sermons by Ali RA during his caliphate. It is a staple book for Shia but does not meet even basic hadith standards, having a disconnected chain of narrators by a few hundred years.
- Shia Rijjal studies (the study of people who are in the chains of narrations) only started hundreds of years after Sunnis, so their historical knowledge is limited and dubious. As a result, Shia hadith are questionable.
- Generally, Shia websites which quote Sunni souces either engage in the gymnastics I described earlier to twist the meaning or they provide 'Sunni' references which are really written by Shia.
- Etc etc. There is more but it will take too long.
Edit: I would sincerely advise not taking your deen from one sided Shia websites wrought by kufr e.g. Al-Islam.