The biggest correlated constant for bugs is that more lines of code = more bugs. As dependencies get updated they add more new features that I probably don't care about which adds more lines of code and therefore more bugs and security vulnerabilities.
I appreciate there is a balance between the two, but in my experience updating dependencies has broken things a lot more often than not updating things has broken things, and when that happens I find it a bit of a ridiculous idea that the maintainer has somehow made their product "more secure"(something that is usually a low dev priority) while at the same time introducing new bugs with the new features (something which is a higher dev priority) and they didn't even get that right.