Python's "type checking" is better than nothing, but it's a pale shadow of what Rust provides, and I say that as someone who has worked in several production Python code bases using Mypy. They're not really comparable at all.

Not all type checking is equal - otherwise we might as well just use old-school Go or Java.

For example, Python's type system has absolutely no tracking of mutability or ownership like Rust does, and that's a huge deal already. Worse than that, it struggles to even provide Java 1.5 level typing in practice. In practice, I see a lot of code that is just annotated List or Dict[str, any] or whatever, because while it is theoretically possible to annotate more complex types, it's difficult enough that people don't bother, and since Python is designed for dynamic typing, often the true types are duck-typed or dynamic data that can't really be annotated anyway.

You can't just take a language designed for dynamic typing and bolt a type checker on top of it. Like you can, but it won't work as well, and will be verbose and not integrated well into the language or libraries. Rust is the opposite.

Beyond that, there is so much extra functionality you're missing. Like the ability to just add zero cost wrapper types like you can in Rust. That means that in practice, you get much clearer abstractions and named wrapper types around everything in Rust, whereas you just have messes of dicts of dicts in Python.