The basic regression discontinuity design (RDD) has less statistical power than a randomized control trial (RCT) with the same sample size. Adding a no-treatment comparison function to the basic RDD creates a comparative RDD (CRD); and when this function comes from the pretest value of the study outcome, a CRD-Pre design results. We use a within-study comparison (WSC) to examine the power of CRD-Pre relative to both basic RDD and RCT. We first build the theoretical foundation for power in CRD-Pre, then derive the relevant variance formulae, and finally compare them to the theoretical RCT variance. We conclude from this theoretical part of this article that (1) CRD-Pre's power gain depends on the partial correlation between the pretest and posttest measures after conditioning on the assignment variable, (2) CRD-Pre is less responsive than basic RDD to how the assignment variable is distributed and where the cutoff is located, and (3) under a variety of conditions, the efficiency of CRD-Pre is very close to that of the RCT. Data from the National Head Start Impact Study are then used to construct RCT, RDD, and CRD-Pre designs and to compare their power. The empirical results indicate (1) a high level of correspondence between the predicted and obtained power results for RDD and CRD-Pre relative to the RCT, and (2) power levels in CRD-Pre and RCT that are very close. The study is unique among WSCs for its focus on the correspondence between RCT and observational study standard errors rather than means. (author abstract)