This matches my experience. People say otherwise might need to put more effort on writing better tests.
That said static typing usually catch minor problems like typo faster. But for dynamic typing it's going to catch by tests a bit later. But usually tests run faster with dynamic languages, so it's a tradeoff.
My favorite approach is the mixed approach like TypeScript:
1. Faster feedback loops: Usually statically typed languages compiles slower thus slower feedback loops. But languages like TypeScript can skip type check and emit only to the runtime, making test watcher very fast - as soon as I hitting Cmd-S I can see the result.
2. Optional typing: Sometimes a function signature is going to be 10x larger than the body, which is really a hassle. Sometimes I just skip them, or skip typing module private functions as long as it's properly tested.