This is entirely true, the Germans considered the western allies to absurdly cautious when on the offence. Even after the Ardennes offensive some people within the allied high command thought the German ground-force strength was on par with their own.(A notion that would have produced hysterical mirth in the German command)
The main problem was the British/US troops were unwilling to place themselves in danger at this stage of the war, and the allied commanders weren’t ruthless enough to force them. (Of course there were a few exceptions to this rule such as the US 101 division.)
Even in 1945 when the Wehrmact had practically disintegrated the allied advance was painfully slow
Of course, the western allies were working on a different set of rules to the Soviets / Germans - the belief in the value of the human lives under their command. Where Zukhov etc under Stalin could not afford to care about the massive losses taken to reach their objective, Ike wanted to bring home as many boys as possible while winning the war - hence the doctrine of letting the arty and fighter-bombers do most of the work. This was a result of the different societies that produced the armies at war - the democratic, citizen army.
Also, the UK had no more men - they had to husband their forces.
It's not absurd caution. it is a lack of ruthlessnes. But I think the society they defended, and that produced such a mindset, is infinitely beter than the ruthless slaughter of the Wehrmacht / Red Army