The pension industry must do more to support smaller defined benefit (DB) schemes, Hughes Price Walker has said, calling on regulators, advisers, and insurers to adapt their processes so schemes, regardless of size, can access efficient and viable endgame solutions.

Hughes Price Walker director and actuary, Ray Hughes, acknowledged that many smaller DB schemes are already well-run and, having done the right preparation, are actively engaging in endgame discussions – benefiting both the scheme and members.

However, he warned that despite smaller DB pension schemes having growing surpluses and strong governance, they still face barriers such as legacy systems, poor data, or limited insurer engagement.

These barriers, which are often structural rather than inherent to the schemes themselves, slow down or complicate the path to buy-in or buyout, Hughes said.

Research supports this, with analysis from LCP revealing that smaller schemes are most likely to highlight data, benefit and legal issues as a key barrier to pursuing their endgame strategy.

Hughes argued that smaller schemes should not be disadvantaged by their size, emphasising that “with the right tools, advice and planning, they can, and increasingly do, achieve strong outcomes”.

But Hughes emphasised that the industry could do more to make this path “smoother and more accessible” for smaller DB schemes and that regulators, advisers, and insurers “all have a role to play”.

In particular, he said the industry should focus on improving insurer engagement strategies tailored to smaller transactions.

He also highlighted the need for wider adoption of streamlined processes for small-scheme buy-ins, alongside scalable and cost-effective administration and data improvement services.

Additionally, Hughes said regulators, advisers, and insurers should look at real-time funding and risk modeling tools designed for smaller schemes and consider regulatory approaches that reflect the resource levels and risk profiles of smaller funds.

He clarified that this isn’t about “rewriting the rulebook”, but about ensuring that the current endgame framework functions effectively for schemes of every size.

“If we don’t take steps now, there’s a real risk of creating a two-speed market where only the largest benefit fully from the opportunities of the endgame,” he said.

“Every member deserves the same focus on outcome security, regardless of scheme size."

---