I agree on the substance of it, but just as a heads up, your use of the phrase "statistically significant" here is wrong. Statistically significant is a technical term - it presumes that you're doing hypothesis testing, that you have a null hypothesis, and that you've established that your data is unlikely (to a certain arbitrary degree) given the null hypothesis.

Given the right statistical model and the right kind of analysis, in a situation where factor A seems to mask factor B you could still estimate factor B and find it to be "statistically significant". Or not - it all depends on the model and the data.

In an informal context like this just say what you mean: 'noticeable'.