That's easily 2 million people (assuming one man, one woman, 1.5 children, which is very conservative). Or the plagues, which would be similarly unlikely not to have been recorded. Given the standard of Egyptian record keeping of the time, this is an absence that would require explanation.
There is not a shred of archaeological or historical evidence, outside of the Bible, that this is even true! You would think that if a people spent 40 years wandering around in the desert they'd leave some archaeological evidence? There's no evidence that somebody named Moses even existed.
However, many if not most of the places mentioned in the Exodus did not exist within the same chronological period as one another.
Pithom (Per‐Atum/Tckenu) and Raamses (Per‐Ramesses), the two "treasure cities" claimed to have been built by the Hebrews, never existed at the same time.
Despite being regarded in Judaism as the primary factual historical narrative of the origin of the religion, culture and ethnicity, Exodus is now accepted by scholars as having been compiled in the 8th–7th centuries BCE from stories dating possibly as far back as the 13th century BCE, with further polishing in the 6th–5th centuries BCE, as a theological and political manifesto to unite the Israelites in the then‐current battle for territory against Egypt.
Archaeologists from the 19th century onward were actually surprised not to find any evidence whatsoever for the events of Exodus.
By the 1970s, archaeologists had largely given up regarding the Bible as any use at all as a field guide.