Because it employs an emergent-learning framework, equivalence-based instruction (EBI) is said to be highly efficient, but its presumed benefits must be compared quantitatively with alternative techniques. In a randomized controlled trial, 61 college students attempted to learn 32 pairs of proprietary and generic drug names using computer-based match-to-sample presentations of auditory and written drug names. Students who received EBI experienced pairings based on stimulus equivalence theory, and they mastered the material quickly. Control-group students practiced relations drawn at random from those that the EBI group learned via training or emergence. Students in the criterion-control group required many more trials to achieve the same accuracy as the EBI group. By way of a yoking procedure, students in the trial-control group received the same number of trials as the EBI students but achieved poorer accuracy and little mastery. Thus, EBI was more efficient and effective than unstructured presentation.