No.

The fundamental problem with the idea of the Axis winning WW2 is that their productive capacity and manpower didn't match those of their enemies, and that they already did almost as well as they could have historically. Once the US enters the war, the Axis is toast: they had no way of striking against America but America could easily reach out and fight them. Before America enters the war, the Axis have to knock out both the UK and the Soviet Union.

They couldn't knock out the UK, because Sealion was an utter mess of an "plan" which would have failed spectacularly even with no UK opposition. See http://www.philmasters.org.uk/SF/Sealion.htm

They couldn't knock out the SU, because to do so you'd probably have to take at least Moscow and probably Leningrad/Stalingrad aswell. While the Nazi's did get close to Moscow in late 1941, they were at the very end of their supply lines and not at all prepared or had the manpower for brutal urban fighting such as would have been needed to take Moscow. In Stalingrad they had much more men and much better preparation and yet failed to take the city from the defenders: Urban combat is hard.

Even if by some miracle the Nazi's do take Moscow (not realistic) the SU would keep fighting, if in a more disorganised state. And the US would still be in the war and be sending troops to North Africa/Italy/France as they did historically.

Tl;dr: No, the Axis did about as well as they could have.

You may have better luck at https://www.reddit.com/r/HistoryWhatIf.