At point blank range, a crossbow has more 'power' than a 15th century pistol, and a longbow has even more. Both are more accurate too...remember '10 paces, turn and fire" ?
the reason for that was that at 20 paces a pistol had a pretty decent chance of missing, no matter how skilled the user. I've had the opportunity to fire a couple, it was hilarious watching certified marksmen (and markswomen) trying to hit a target with period quality weapons, powder and balls...not modern blackpowder versions which are much, much more poerful and accurate, on a par with cartridge weapons out to 100 metres.
firearms were horrendously expensive to make at the outset and really only became popular because they were a lot smaller than a crossbow, took much less training and practice than a longbow (and casting musket balls was a lot easier and faster than making arrows), they could be stored and carried loaded for extended periods and once mechanical locks came around they could be concealed more easily, giving the punch of a dagger at more than arm's length. Most muskets were 'point and click' used in lrge numbers without really aiming....it took almost no time, probably a day, to train soldiers to reload a musket 'by the numbers' and fire as a unit...it took a lifetime to create an archer.
a matchlock, or even a wheellock pistol shouldn't have nearly the effective range of a crossbow or even a sling and I'd even add a -1 or more to hit outside of close range...sort of the reverse of the 'point blank shot' feat.