Yes, because building a point-release distribution is a very different thing. With a point-release distribution, you collect all of your software as source code, and you build it into binaries, and then you start ironing out the bugs before you can release it to the end-users.
So what that basically means is that you create a snapshot of the evolution of a GNU/Linux system, and then you make sure that you get rid of the vast majority of the bugs in that snapshot, while in the meantime and in the background, the evolution of the software continues.
By the time you've gone through an initial alpha release, several beta releases, several release candidates and then onto the official final release, the only thing that might still be up-to-date with the evolution of the GNU/Linux ecosystem would be your kernel, because it's easier to grab a newer kernel than, say, to grab a new
glibc, recompile the whole system against that and then find that it conflicts with the versions of certain other libraries and/or packages you've got on your system.
And even then still, you've just put out that shiny new release full of outdated software, and then you're going to have to keep that up-to-date with new updates because of security flaws that have been discovered in the meantime, and so on. So in the end, your long-term-support release is going to require even more work to keep it in a stable and functional state, and you'll still be left with outdated software.
Now take Manjaro instead. New software is bundled into snapshots and tested, and these new snapshots will contain most of the security fixes ─ the exception being a critical flaw that was only just discovered and that requires that certain components be updated immediately.
The snapshots you're creating are also fairly consistent, because after all, Arch ─ which is Manjaro's upstream ─ has already gone through some testing of its own before those same new versions of the software appear in Manjaro, and then Manjaro applies more testing via its Unstable, Testing and Stable-Staging branches.
Which do you think is easier to maintain? And perhaps even more crucially, which do you think will ultimately leave you with the most stable (and supported) operating system on your computer? The point-release distro that still needs to be kept up-to-date, or the tested and up-to-date curated rolling-release system?
There's a reason why Manjaro works the way it does. There are plenty of Debians and Debian spinoffs, RedHats and RedHat spinoffs already. And then there's always Slackware ─ still receiving security updates, but their software itself is archaic because there hasn't been any new release anymore since 2014. (Their KDE version still stands at 4.2 at installation time and at 4.14 after updating.)