There has been a long-standing debate regarding the existence of a "value-growth" anomaly in financial economic research. Previous studies have shown that value stocks (i.e., stocks with low price-to-book ratios) have higher returns than growth stocks (i.e., stocks with high price-to-book ratios) in the United States and markets around the world, even after adjusting for a market-wide risk factor. What are some possible explanations for why value stocks might outperform growth stocks on a risk-adjusted basis? Is this value-growth "anomaly" consistent with the existence of an efficient stock market?