Is code quality better by default in statically typed languages?

Question

Programming

I work with a dynamically typed language. There is a feeling that working on a project where a language with static typing is used is easier, since static typing itself can protect against a large number of runtime errors even before compilation

Plus types = documentation and code are easier to write, no need to guess what is meant by what argument. (my subjective opinion)
In other words, can we say that, on average, code in a statically typed language is of higher quality than code in a dynamically typed language? Or is the neighbor's grass just greener?

Answer 1

Let's start with the fact that typing is static, not statistical.
In conclusion, code quality is a rather ephemeral concept, because it is very subjective and depends on the preferences of the person who reads the given code.
Therefore, the wording is more reliable - "Static typing allows you to find more errors at the stage of code compilation, and also forces a more complete description of the application area in the programming language."
Deciding whether this makes the code better in a broad sense is already a matter of team priorities, because for someone it is better to code that can be quickly rolled out in three days and that covers 80% of the tasks and brings profit before the code , which needs to be licked for two weeks.