I think both ethical theories play a role in how we act. I don't think it is a question of which is more reasonable, rather I think it is a question of pragmatics.

Utilitarianism is consequential, where we anticipate the consequences of acting the way we act and try to act to maximize benefit to others. Virtue Ethics derives the rightness or wrongness of one's conduct from the character of the behavior itself rather than the outcomes of the conduct.

I think in practice, if the consequences of our actions are easy to determine then we tend to act on a Utilitarian basis for the best consequence, but if the consequences can't be determined ahead of time and are too ambiguous for us to predict, then we act based on our moral character.

For a different, idiosyncratic perspective: Utilitarianism as virtue ethics.

Utilitarianism theory is based on the principle of utility; which is doing whatever bring the most happiness and least unhappiness to the greatest number affected by a moral decision. All beings are impartially considered and the ends justify the means, only outcomes matter.

Or let's consider Act Utilitarianism as a moral theory which assumes that each individual action is to be evaluated by reference to the principle of utility, does it make people happy? Then do it. Unfortunately, Act Utilitarianism has its flaws. For instance, "Act Utilitarianism" is incompatible with justice and privacy, allowing an innocent person to be falsely accused to benefit the many, and a person's privacy to be violated if they are unaware of the perpetrator derives pleasure. In addition, it demands total impartiality and does not consider backward reasons, requiring us to treat friends and family the way we treat strangers.

We may define a virtue as a trait of character, manifested in habitual action, that it is good for a person to have. “A virtue ethicist points to the fact that helping a person is exercising the character trait of benevolence.” The virtue ethics approach is to be a good person. In virtue ethics, one’s character emerges from a “relevant moral community.” Therefore, it is important to account for the moral agent’s community or communities within which he or she operates.

“According to Aristotle Moral Virtue is a Habit. You must consistently choose to do good acts deliberately for the right reasons. For example, you cannot be considered virtuous for catching a ball before it hits a child in a baseball game thus saving that child if you simply wanted to catch the ball and take it home with you as a trophy to show to your friends. You should have saved the child from the incoming ball out of genuine virtue and care towards the child.”

Aristotle also believes we learn virtue by doing the right things constantly until we are habituated. We learn by doing as children and character is the result of habits, which in turn, are developed from repeated actions. Problems with virtue ethics is that it can be considered too flexible to make any firm ethical statements, too personal, virtues can be in conflict, virtues can be used to justify an immoral action.

As you can see nothing or no-one is perfect. But, If I had to choose between becoming a Utilitarian or a Virtue Ethicist, I would definitely consider Virtue Ethics as my working theory. Simply, because it defines the habitual characteristics of a genuinely good person.

I think that our moral decisions are based in three criteria. The first one is a virtue ethics, second one feelings and finally utilitarianism. I think that during our life, in different moments we use all these theories (three criteria that I says).

For example is correct defecate over the flag of United States? If we say no, surely is because we have the feeling that is not correct defecate. But in this example we can check that is not a question of conquences (basically because there are not consequences) or a question of virtues ( basically because we are not harming anybody). In a few words we feel that is wrong, and for this reason is wrong.

In other cases we can see that ara more important the values, and in other examples are more important the consequences.

Virtue ethics seems to have more utility than utilitarianism, so I'll choose that one.

Which do you think is the more reasonable theory?
Virtue Ethics vs Utilitarianism — MonfortS26

What would cause us to care one way or the other--virtue ethics vs utilitarianism? Or for that matter, why care about ethics, the general welfare, the true, good, and beautiful, etc.? As Vernon said,

one’s character emerges from a “relevant moral community.” — Vernon

Do we not have to be interested in ethics before we can decide how to be ethical, how to do the right thing -- whether for virtue or for utilitarian considerations? If so, this would seem to give the edge to virtue ethics.