Yes, I think so too, if not just for the reduced number of round-trips to the database. The evaluation strategy that PostgreSQL employs for CTEs is essentially a degenerate form of seminaive evaluation where it only has to consider the delta for one subgoal in each rule due to being restricted to linearly recursive programs with no mutual recursion. The restriction to not have mutual recursion means that PostgreSQL can just stratify the CTE and compute a fixed point using the degenerate seminaive algorithm for each strata. Once a stratum is done, it can consider its idb as ground facts in the next, and so on.
I am really unhappy about the design of CTEs, and frankly I think it is a clunky hack designed by someone who was not aware of all the research on Datalog evaluation, which Ullman and others had already written excellent textbooks about at the time. CTEs are simultaneously too powerful - Turing-completeness in a declarative query language is a sure way to tell that the designers screwed up - and too restricted because being stuck in the Turing tarpit rules out so many techniques for optimization.
I didn't know about DuckDB's approach, but it seems to be a way to mark your relations as moded and exploit that during the evaluation. It appears to improve performance, but unfortunately the design it builds on is inherently flawed. I wish SQL would get a proper pure Datalog fragment in the future.