To be honest, they don't really compare. Hancock would slaughter Duke if this was based on jazz compositions whereas I feel Duke's R&B jazz fusion work is simply better than Herbie's catalogue.

Herbs is where I go if I want to listen JAZZ fusion not soft but not really hard, more introspective. Duke has more of a mellow fun-timey vibe that I feel Hancock never really captured.

As far as cultural impact, it takes a real fan to know George outside of "Sweet Baby" or "Reach It," but any jazz aficionado should be able to school you on Headhunters and In A Silent Way. Herbie worked on classics, records any jazz fan could appreciate as they stand as the pinnacle of output of legends careers. Duke just made gems: those pretty things (amazing albums) you find when digging through your moms jewelry box (old records). You're not going to find anybody debating about them because if they've gone through the trouble of tracking them down they're probably already fans.

Duke's Zappa period is cool but nobody listens to Zappa trying to mimic George, but I'll always attempt to play a Hancock standard or even not-so-standard like "Tell Me A Bedtime Story" or "Butterfly Dreams."

TLDR No. Duke has no standards. Nobody wants to imitate him. He has amazing songs in his repertoire but he never made an essential like Hancock has many times over.