Yes but with a couple of caveats.
First, it's simply not practical to run Time Machine on a directly attached hard drive any longer. Apple's approach to file management with their APFS data recording is deeply hostile to hard drives; it is specifically meant for SSDs, whereas the now disappearing HFS+ is hard drive oriented. Too much random writing with APFS, rather than recording in sequence, which is great for wear leveling on SSD, horrible for any expectation of speed on a hard drive. If you have TM and you must use a hard drive or hard drives plural, it should go to an SMB3 networked server such as a Synology or QNAP device.
Second, there are benefits to having a mirrored copy of your installation. While Apple Silicon royally gets in the way of cloning your OS, preventing the external booting that was a core feature of PPC and Intel, SuperDuper! and Carbon Copy Cloner give you very much more fine-grained control than Time Machine over what gets backed up, when it gets backed up, under what circumstances it gets backed up (e.g. only when a certain other drive is attached), and how often it gets backed up, and they are much faster when it comes to restoring user files, applications and settings, something they can still do despite Apple manacling the in-computer SSD to the restore and boot process and blocking booting from an external drive only. Additionally these apps can clone external drives, which TM cannot, and they can verify the data in real time against errors in the destination drive for the backup, which, again, Time Machine cannot.
Between CCC and SuperDuper, again, as I say, I don't know a lot of specifics, but CCC has a bunch of stuff in the area of backups over networks, synchronizing multiple drives, error tolerance, and additional layers of complexity about setting rules for scheduling backups that SuperDuper does not. Having just bought a NAS, I am considering switching to CCC from SuperDuper; I've already set Time Machine up in SMB3, which makes a lovely change from using it with attached drives; it just automatically does the job over WiFi 6 in a reasonably brisk way (140-180 megabit average speed).
