Is there really such a disparity in amount of tactics between e4 and d4 openings?

Every one of my e4 games that I’ve played recently has a multitude of tactics which I haven’t found previously in d4 games.

I used to be an e4 player around the 1000 level ( until about 1 yr ago my chess knowledge extended to just the en passant rule, so I consider that pretty decent for just starting out, also I’m 14) , then I watched Simon Williams’ London System video series, and switched to d4, just recently, I decided to switch back to e4 as white and e4,e5 as black ( from Sicilian, which I finally managed to realise I know absolutely nothing about), recently the amount of tactics I’ve been noticing, and the potential tactics seems to be ridiculously higher than in d4 openings. I’ve made it from about 1540 rapid to 1607 ( stopped playing blitz on advice from my IM almost GM Indian cousins 15 yr old prodigy, lol) simply after switching to e4 + e4,e5, and simply being able to see tactics better than my opponents. I have to say switching back to e4 is refreshing, the positions are much more open and the games are open.

So my questions to all those who wish to answer or the experts of this game, is there really such a difference in potential of tactics between e4 and d4, or is this perhaps due to some other reason (e.g I’ve improved a bit in tactics and seeing a bit more than before, or I’m noticing new tactics because I’ve switched to a new opening and there really isn’t that many tactics).

Thanks in advance to any who would take the time to answer the question of this patzer.

e4 more tactical than d4 is common knowledge.

Thats why e4 is called open game and d4 closed game.

"... The most important criterion in selecting a suitable opening is that one should feel comfortable playing it. ... the commonly made distinction between 1 e4 and 1 d4, that the former leads to a more tactical game and the latter to positional play, can hardly be maintained on close examination. What is true is that 1 e4 tends to bring about critical positions more quickly than in games begun with 1 d4. Perhaps for this reason 1 d4 might be recommended to the less impatient player, or one of slower emotions who wants time to settle down to the game before the real fighting has to start. ... In comparison with the King's Gambit, White takes considerably less risk [with 1 d4 d5 2 c4]. ..." - IM Bill Hartston (1981)

It's hard to say whether 1.e4 is more tactical than 1.d4 because I could think of many positions that are extremely tactical as well as positional arising from both first moves (1.e4: obviously the open sicilian; 1.d4: semi-slav botvinnik variation). 

It's more a matter of whether or not the center is open or closed.

Both e4 openings and d4 openings can turn into either an open center, or a closed center.

On a board with a closed center (for example, lines in: the e4 Ruy Lopez, the e4 French Advance; or the d4 Queen's Gambit Declined, the d4 King's Indian Defense), the tactics are still there—they're just more subtle, and often less about winning material outright, and generally more about gaining positional advantages.

Don't be fooled into thinking a closed center means permanently less tactics, though. Sometimes things can get sharp real fast.