Definitely yes. It had the best payload of the three (11 short tons or 9979 kg), was fastest of the three (245 knots) and had the smallest crew (seven). It was far more versatile and modifiable than either B-17 or B-24 and it had the second longesty range after B-24.
It was extremely manouevreable (hence the famous “corkscrew” manouevre, which was impossible with B-24 and dangerous with B-17) and was described pleasant to fly.
Its direct successors, Avro Lincoln and Avro Shackleton, served in the Royal Air Force Coastal Command until 1991.
The only real vice of Lancaster was that it was almost impossible to bail out. The Lancaster crew losses were high. This issue was pointed out by young mathematician Freeman Dyson, Avro recognized the problem and suggested and planned a solution for it, but Vice Air Marshal Arthur “Butcher” Harris did not approve it - for him, the smooth production of Lancasters was more important than the lives of the young aviators, as the suggested solution would have meant redesigning the nose and an interruption to production.
Source: Susanna Viljanen (Quora)