SME is better because it allows you to do much more, IF YOU FOLLOW ITS RULES.
I don't think it's accurate to say either that SME is better, or that it allows you to do more, than FreeNAS. They're different systems, designed for different (although slightly overlapping) purposes. SME does some things better, while FreeNAS does others better.
If anything, I'd say that FreeNAS allows you to do more, because you can install whatever software you want in a jail. Want a public-facing web and mail server? No problem--but you'll have to configure it yourself. Want VirtualBox? Click two buttons and enter a hostname. If it'll run on Linux and it's Free Software, there's a 99+% chance it'll run on FreeBSD (and thus in a FreeNAS jail) too. And with VirtualBox, if it won't run on FreeBSD, you can build a VM of whatever OS you want that it will run on.
SME certainly has its advantages. It's an excellent choice for a pushbutton-simple, secure, NAT router and SMB web/mail/file server. I wish it did ZFS, and it'd be really nice if it were designed to use a small boot/system device, combined with a larger storage device/pool, but it is what it is, and it works well enough for me that I've been using it for 15+ years.
FreeNAS has its advantages as well. It supports more network protocols than SME (AFP, NFS, iSCSI, rsync, WebDAV), for one. It uses ZFS, for another (and that's huge). Replacement of failed drives (or replacing drives with larger drives to expand your pool) is pushbutton simple. The architecture is of an appliance, and any changes you make or software you add is in a separate jail which doesn't interfere with the primary OS. The developers make available a bunch of additional packages a plugins, making installation a point-and-click affair.
At the end of the day, there's very little that can be done in SME and not in FreeNAS, or that can be done in FreeNAS and not in SME. But the set of things that are easy in each system is quite different. You may well find, as I have, that the best course of action is to use both.