This is one of those "not always".
Its a risk assessment and balance. Credit transactions in the rest of the world are riskier and are thus accommodated with more controls, but this causes constraints in volume. The US has a LOT more volume in credit transactions than any other country. This volume is due to the ease, flexibility, and insecurity (for the lender) of the credit system here. Volume is the entire purpose of credit cards (vs debit). If the volume (thus profits) lost are greater than the fraud prevented... then it isn't a better system. However, if the fraud is too high in the system, then you need more controls. In the rest of the world, credit fraud would be rampant if setup as the US. So they need more controls in place to lower that fraud. Although lowering volume, due to the high amount of fraud that is curtailed, it will increase profits.
Think of it like this: There are places in the world where you can put a glass jar in a church/temple and people will donate. Other places will need an armed security guard. The number of donations coming in will be higher with the glass jar. Of course when someone steals the jar, a lot is lost. But depending on the location, that loss will be less than the amount donated vs the security guard. In others it will be the other way around.
You can also think of it like opening a tab at a bar or your small town grocery store (swipe system). They do this cause it increases volume & sales (US). If people didn't pay tabs the store will certainly stop offering tabs (politically unstable countries - cash based economy). Converse, if the owner wanted your fingerprints & government ID on file, less people would open tabs (PIN & CHIP).
As for security, to over simplify, a credit card has 25 numbers on it. Pin & chip has 29. The assumption is that the last 4 aren't written anywhere and thus people think they are more secure. In general, it is kind* of true. However, for the instances where it isn't, there is a much greater burden of proof on the innocent with the PIN system than with the swipe system. Thus more risk for them.
Its not necessarily about the amount of fraud but rather the impacts of it on profits. Everyone does win when fraud goes down and doesn't negatively impact profits.
* = Social engineering will always beat tech engineering. People are usually the weakest link.