The ABI is charging too high fees for providers to take part in the pension dashboard and it would alienate smaller firms, the industry has said.
This week's 93 respondents were also asked whether their scheme had changed their currency hedging strategy, and whether longevity assumptions are too prudent.
A majority (53%) of respondents believed the fee is too high and inhibits smaller providers' input.
One argued: "It's the usual cabal of big providers commanding everything - no room for the little guys to have their say."
Another questioned whether the fee would provide good value.
"Exactly what is the business supposed to get for its £50,000?" they asked. "Does this rank as a good investment?"
However, 22% disagreed, with some arguing the fees will drive efforts.
"Having some skin in the game will focus the minds of participants," one said.
Of the 25% who were unsure, one saw the argument both ways.
"There is a cost to be met in setting up the dashboard and it's going to sit with providers to cough up," they said. "I'm uneasy, however, that smaller providers and third-party administrators may find themselves done over in the rush to launch a scale proposition."
Respondents were split on this question, with 35% agreeing the assumptions were overly prudent and 38% disputing the suggestion.
One who argued they were not too cautious said prudence was the "cornerstone" of pensions.
"It is far better to be prudent and have some left over than overspending and having to make good the shortfall somehow," they continued.
One who believed assumptions are too prudent said most schemes are simply seeking to satisfy The Pensions Regulator (TPR).
"TPR and the accountants expect us to use such ‘prudent' (i.e. deeply conservative) longevity assumptions," they said. "Nobody wants TPR poking around, so we play along with the pantomime."
Another added: "Actuaries will always fear the worst while thinking everyone is immortal."
Of the 27% who were unsure, one said: "We will only know once the last member has died, or the scheme runs out of money - whatever happens first."
Most respondents (41%) were unsure on whether 2017 will be the year for de-risking, while 36% agreed it will be.
Of those who concurred, one said there are always opportunities for schemes if they can afford it.
"The best time to de-risk has always just passed!" they said. "There is no point in trying to second guess and predict the markets, so if a scheme is ready and able to do it and can afford to do so, then it should crack on and do it."
Some who were unsure argued it may even be too early, with 2018 providing better opportunities.
Another added: "Signs are that we are in for high volatility which may actually work the other way."
Of the 23% who disagreed, one argued schemes should "hold your nerve" as gilt yields may rise again.
Another questioned the benefits of de-risking: "Will somebody please explain to me this mania for DB schemes to de-risk?"
Almost half of respondents (47%) said they had not amended their currency hedging strategy in light of increased FX volatility and falls in the pound, with just 9% saying they had.
One respondent whose scheme hadn't made changes said attempting to predict the markets was futile.
"I gave up trying to predict exchange rates back in June, after ‘Black Thursday'," they said. "It's anybody's guess what will happen."
However, some said they were keeping currency hedging under regular review.
"Looking at hedging FX rates at these levels is not a bad idea and I will be discussing this," one stated.
One respondent whose scheme had changed its strategy said currency market movements were not the only reason for doing so: "Volatility is not the only driver. Liquidity was also a consideration."
A significant number of respondents (30%) said they did not hedge currency risk exposure.
One commented: "Our scheme was warned against such exposure a good many years ago and it has proved to be right."
One in seven respondents was unsure.
The Professional Pensions confidence tracker fell to a six-month low this week, hitting -10.11.
Out of the 93 respondents, 44% said it was unlikely or very unlikely that assets would grow in value over the next six months, while 30% said it was likely or very likely.
Defined benefit (DB) schemes that provide GMPs must revisit and, where necessary, top-up historic cash equivalent transfer values (CETVs) that have been calculated on an unequal basis, a landmark court judgment says today.
Technology platform PensionSync has partnered with quantum employment pioneer My Digital to help contractors and employers manage pensions as more workers do temporary work for multiple firms.
Capita Pensions has partnered with data technology solutions firm Intellica to tackle the GMP equalisation challenges facing pension schemes.
The Hewlett Packard Retirement Benefit Plan has reappointed EQ Paymaster as its third-party administrator (TPA) for five years.
Schemes and their administrators have rightly received much praise for ensuring that pensions have continued to be paid in full and on time during an unprecedented period of disruption.