(Just to be clear, when I say Vader's Fist, I mean the First Legion/501st legion post-Order 66) I'm wondering because while I do have a fairly good confidence in what the answer is, remember that DT's had all these bio-enhancements done on them (which all occur after the already-lofty standards, which include the height requirement of 6'5" and being top of their training classes). Furthermore, on-screen, DT's had better performances than Vader's Fist, like annihilating the rebels in the Battle of Scariff (albeit their performances in Rebels were disappointing). Also, to my knowledge, members of the First Legion are regular stormtroopers that just happen to be better than all the other stormtroopers. Meaning, these stormtroopers had to have failed the entrance requirements for becoming DT's during their academy years.
Just to be clear, what criteria should we be using to judge? Coolness, military effectiveness, badassery?
The Death Troopers weren't bad but I don't think the Death Troopers fared any better than standard Imperial Stormtroopers/Shoretroopers during Scarif - especially towards the end when they clowned them against the two pseudo-Jedi stand-in's, Baz and Imwe - where they became standard Imperial stock characters. Rebels just shat on them like they did all the villains but especially Imperial military. The Clones always were made just better than Imperials in canon. I think SCAR may be closest to the Clones in terms of combat competence and effectiveness but they're a small squad and subjected to the normal limits of antagonists .
Death Troopers are just glorified stormtroopers. Vader's Fist sacked the Jedi Temple. A squad of Death Troopers couldn't deal with Saw Gerrera and two kiddos in Rebels. Plot will be plot but it's canon.