Background Patient-reported outcomes are critical for obtaining valuable patient insight into different surgical treatment options with comparable clinical outcomes. This study aimed to compare early postoperative patient-reported symptoms and functioning between thoracoscopic segmentectomy and lobectomy for small-sized (<= 2 cm) peripheral non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Patients and Methods This study included 110 patients who underwent thoracoscopic segmentectomy or lobectomy for peripheral NSCLC <= 2 cm in a multicenter prospective longitudinal study (CN-PRO-Lung 1). Symptom severity, functional status, and short-term clinical outcomes were compared between the groups. Symptom severity and functional status were measured using the MD Anderson Symptom Inventory-Lung Cancer at baseline, daily post-surgery, and weekly post-discharge for up to 4 weeks. Both the proportion of moderate-to-severe scores and mean scores on a 0-10 scale were compared between the groups. Results Overall, 48 and 62 patients underwent thoracoscopic segmentectomy and lobectomy, respectively. No significant between-group differences were found in the severity of the top five symptoms (coughing, shortness of breath, pain, fatigue, and disturbed sleep) or in the impairment of all six function items (work, walking, general activity, enjoyment of life, mood, and relations with others) during both the 6-day postoperative hospitalization and the 4-week post-discharge (all p > 0.05). Short-term clinical outcomes of postoperative hospital stay, operative time, drainage time, postoperative in-hospital oral morphine equivalent dose, and complication rate were also comparable (all p > 0.05). Conclusions In patients with peripheral NSCLC <= 2 cm, thoracoscopic segmentectomy and lobectomy might produce comparable symptom burden and functional impairment during the early postoperative period.