Advanced Functional Materials vs Small
Advanced Functional Materials and Small both publish selective materials papers, but AFM rewards functional materials breadth while Small rewards compact small-scale materials stories.
Senior Researcher, Chemistry
Author context
Specializes in manuscript preparation and peer review strategy for chemistry journals, with deep experience evaluating submissions to JACS, Angewandte Chemie, Chemical Reviews, and ACS-family journals.
Journal fit
See whether this paper looks realistic for Advanced Functional Materials.
Run the Free Readiness Scan with Advanced Functional Materials as your target journal and see whether this paper looks like a realistic submission.
Advanced Functional Materials at a glance
Key metrics to place the journal before deciding whether it fits your manuscript and career goals.
What makes this journal worth targeting
- IF 19.0 puts Advanced Functional Materials in a visible tier — citations from papers here carry real weight.
- Scope specificity matters more than impact factor for most manuscript decisions.
- Acceptance rate of ~~12-18% means fit determines most outcomes.
When to look elsewhere
- When your paper sits at the edge of the journal's stated scope — borderline fit rarely improves after submission.
- If timeline matters: Advanced Functional Materials takes ~~21 day. A faster-turnaround journal may suit a grant or job deadline better.
- If OA is required: gold OA costs ~$5,200 USD. Check institutional agreements before submitting.
Advanced Functional Materials vs Small at a glance
Use the table to see where the journals diverge before you read the longer comparison. The right choice usually comes down to scope, editorial filter, and the kind of paper you actually have.
Question | Advanced Functional Materials | Small |
|---|---|---|
Best fit | Advanced Functional Materials is a highly cited materials science journal published by. | Small published by Wiley is the premier journal for nanotechnology and nanomaterials. |
Editors prioritize | Functional advance, not just materials novelty | Functional nanomaterial or nanodevice with demonstrated application performance |
Typical article types | Full Paper, Communication | Full Paper, Short Communication |
Closest alternatives | Advanced Materials (Wiley, IF ~27), ACS Nano (ACS, IF ~15.8) | Nano Letters, ACS Nano |
Quick answer: Choose Advanced Functional Materials when the manuscript's strongest claim is functional materials performance, mechanism, device behavior, or platform breadth. Choose Small when the strongest claim is a compact small-scale materials or nanoscience story where the structure-function link is sharp and visually clear. Both journals can publish nanomaterials, biointerfaces, energy materials, and device papers. The difference is whether function or scale is the lead argument.
If you need a fast journal-fit read before submission, start with the AI manuscript review. For nearby decisions, read Advanced Materials vs Small and Advanced Functional Materials vs ACS Nano.
Method note: this page uses Wiley Advanced Functional Materials and Small public journal materials, local Manusights materials-journal guidance, and Manusights pre-submission review patterns reviewed in April 2026. This is the canonical comparison page; do not also build small-vs-advanced-functional-materials.How The Journals Compare
Question | Advanced Functional Materials | Small |
|---|---|---|
Core editorial question | Is this a strong functional materials advance? | Does the small-scale design create a clear materials result? |
Strongest paper | Functional performance plus mechanism or device relevance | Compact nanoscience or microstructure-function story |
Natural reader | Broad functional materials community | Small-scale materials and nanoscience readers |
Common fit mistake | Paper is mostly nano packaging without functional depth | Paper is too broad or device-heavy for Small's compact story style |
Better first page | Function, mechanism, benchmark, and application boundary | Small-scale design, proof, and clean figure sequence |
The decision is not "which journal is higher?" It is which first-page story is more honest.
Which Should You Submit To?
Submit to Advanced Functional Materials if the manuscript is fundamentally about what a material does: electronic, optical, magnetic, mechanical, catalytic, biological, energy, sensing, or device function.
Submit to Small if the manuscript is fundamentally about how small-scale structure creates an outcome: nanostructure, microstructure, interface, particle, thin film, biointerface, or compact device result.
This page owns the AFM vs Small decision. It should not cannibalize Advanced Materials vs Small or AFM vs ACS Nano, which answer different pairwise choices.
Choose AFM If / Choose Small If
Manuscript pattern | Better first target |
|---|---|
Functional material with performance and mechanism | Advanced Functional Materials |
Nanostructure-driven result with compact evidence | Small |
Device behavior is the main value | Advanced Functional Materials |
Small-scale design is the main value | Small |
Broad platform material with multiple functional demonstrations | Advanced Functional Materials |
Focused biointerface, energy, sensing, or nanoscience story | Small |
If the manuscript gets stronger when the abstract leads with function, AFM may be cleaner. If it gets stronger when the abstract leads with structure-function at small length scale, Small may be cleaner.
Journal fit
Ready to find out which journal fits? Run the scan for Advanced Functional Materials first.
Run the scan with Advanced Functional Materials as the target. Get a fit signal that makes the comparison concrete.
What Advanced Functional Materials Wants
Advanced Functional Materials is strongest when function carries the paper. It is not enough to make a new material. The manuscript should show what the material does, why that function is better or different, and what mechanism or design principle supports the claim.
AFM is usually stronger for:
- functional materials with device or application relevance
- performance-mechanism packages
- electronic, optical, energy, bio, soft matter, polymer, and interface systems
- studies where functional breadth matters more than compactness
- materials platforms with enough evidence to support a broad claim
AFM gets weaker when the paper has attractive nanoscale morphology but thin functional payoff.
What Small Wants
Small is strongest when the paper is compact and visually clear. The small-scale feature should matter causally, not just decorate the title or first figure.
Small is usually stronger for:
- nanomaterials and microstructured materials
- sharp structure-function stories
- compact energy, bio, sensing, interface, and device results
- papers that need polish and focus more than broad platform framing
- manuscripts where the small-scale result is the whole reason to read
Small gets weaker when the manuscript needs a long platform argument or the main value is device performance rather than small-scale insight.
In Our Pre-Submission Review Work
In our pre-submission review work, AFM vs Small decisions usually fail when authors do not choose whether the paper is a functional story or a scale story.
AFM paper squeezed into Small: the data support a broader functional materials argument, but the authors frame the paper as a compact nanoscience story. That can hide the strongest claim.
Small paper inflated for AFM: the paper has a strong small-scale result, but the functional breadth is not enough for AFM. The result may read better as a clean Small paper than as an overclaimed AFM submission.
Figure-sequence mismatch: AFM wants function, mechanism, and benchmark to build a broad argument. Small wants the visual story to become clear quickly.
Benchmark drift: authors compare performance to unrelated systems because the target journal is unclear.
What To Fix Before Submission
For AFM, make the functional claim auditable. The manuscript should name the property, device behavior, benchmark, mechanism, and application boundary.
For Small, make the small-scale design auditable. The manuscript should show the structure, why it matters, and how it produces the result without making the reader decode a broad platform pitch.
For both, avoid generic "advanced material" language. State the exact contribution.
Choose AFM If / Choose Small If The Case Is Close
Choose AFM if the close-call abstract becomes sharper when you lead with function. The strongest AFM version says what the material does, why the performance matters, and what mechanism supports it.
Choose Small if the close-call abstract becomes sharper when you lead with small-scale design. The strongest Small version says how the nanoscale or microscale feature creates the outcome and why the compact evidence is enough.
The warning sign is a page one that uses both "functional" and "small-scale" but does not prove either as the lead contribution.
The Editor's First-Page Test
For AFM, the first page should make the functional advance impossible to miss. For Small, the first page should make the small-scale structure-function link impossible to miss. If an editor has to infer which argument matters more, the submission is under-positioned.
The First Reviewer Objection
Predict the first reviewer objection before choosing the journal. If the likely objection is "the functional evidence is too thin for the claim," AFM is risky. If the likely objection is "the small-scale feature is attractive but not causal," Small is risky. The better target is the one where the hardest objection can be answered with existing data rather than a new story.
That test is especially useful after rejection, when authors are tempted to retitle the same evidence instead of retargeting the actual claim.
Submit If / Think Twice If
Submit to AFM if:
- function is the lead contribution
- mechanism and benchmarks are strong
- the result has materials breadth
- the device or application boundary is clear
Submit to Small if:
- small-scale design drives the result
- the story is compact and figure-led
- function is clear but not necessarily platform-wide
- the evidence supports a focused claim
Think twice for both if:
- the result is a small parameter gain
- morphology is described without consequence
- the target is chosen by metric rank alone
Bottom Line
Advanced Functional Materials is usually the better target for functional materials breadth. Small is usually the better target for compact small-scale materials and nanoscience stories where the structure-function link is clear.
Use the AI manuscript review if you need a fast read on which journal your first page actually supports.
Frequently asked questions
Submit to Advanced Functional Materials when the manuscript's strongest contribution is functional materials performance, mechanism, device behavior, or platform breadth. Submit to Small when the strongest contribution is a compact nanoscience, microstructure, or small-scale materials story.
Usually yes. AFM is centered on functional materials breadth, while Small is centered on small-scale materials, nanoscience, and compact figure-led stories.
Yes, especially when the key contribution is function, device behavior, mechanism, or application breadth rather than small-scale identity itself.
The reverse page would answer the same author decision. Manusights uses this page as the canonical comparison to avoid cannibalization.
Sources
- https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/16163028
- https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/16136829
- https://newsroom.wiley.com/press-releases/press-release-details/2024/Wiley-Expands-Advanced-Journal-Portfolio-into-Life-and-Health-Sciences-Deepens-Physical-Science-Offering/default.aspx
Final step
See whether this paper fits Advanced Functional Materials.
Run the Free Readiness Scan with Advanced Functional Materials as your target journal and get a manuscript-specific fit signal before you commit.
Anthropic Privacy Partner. Zero-retention manuscript processing.
Where to go next
Same journal, next question
Supporting reads
Conversion step
See whether this paper fits Advanced Functional Materials.
Anthropic Privacy Partner. Zero-retention manuscript processing.