Matt O’Connor
Okay. Thank you very much.
Operator
Our next question comes from Ryan Nash of Goldman Sacks. Your line is open.
Ryan Nash, Goldman Sacks
Hey, good morning, guys.
Unidentified Company Representative
Good morning, Ryan.
Ryan Nash
Aleem, just wanted to make sure I got the message correct on expenses. I think this is now the second straight quarter we did see expenses come below the 1, 3 level. I think you averaged around 1, 3 for the year. Given the fact I know there are some seasonal elements to it, does the 1, 3 to 1, 35 level still hold?
The reason I ask, sounds like the revenue environment is marginally more challenging at this point in time so just want to get a sense of where you would expect expenses to fall out for the full year.
Aleem Gillani
Yes, Ryan, I do think that full year expenses as I look at them today are going to be in that sort of $5.2 billion to $5.3 billion range for the year.
Clearly, as you point out, they are revenue dependent and the revenue environment could move us out of that range either higher or lower and obviously as we look at overall expenses, we’re focused very much on the efficiency ratio.
So as we think about what the revenue environment will be and how we adjust expenses against that revenue environment, if you start off with a core expectation between 5.2 and 5.3 and then think about, we will adjust, we will calibrate that as revenues go up or down. Thinking about Q1 in this context, Q1 probably is up towards the top end of the quarterly range as a result of the normal seasonal effects.
Ryan Nash
Got it. And then just putting all the guidance together, do you still expect to grow earnings in 2015 from the 324 level?
Aleem Gillani
We are going to be targeting continued improvement at the Company. So whether that is efficiency ratio, whether that’s earnings, whether that’s returns, we want to continue to make this company better over time.
Ryan Nash
Got it. I figured I had to take a shot. And I guess lastly, Bill, you talked about 3.5% energy exposure, but can you just give us a sense of energy exposure for the overall bank, both from a lending perspective and from a fee income perspective? How is what we’ve seen happened to energy prices impacting capital markets and then from a consumer perspective are you starting to see the benefits of lower gas prices showing up in both consumer spending and a willingness to borrow.
Bill Rogers
Sure. I’ll try to hit all of those. I think Aleem outlined the portfolio. It’s about 3.5% of the portfolio and about 70% of that portfolio is really not significantly related to falling oil prices, about 50% of the portfolio is utilities. Midstream, that’s just the transporting of oil from one place to another. That’s not as impacted by prices. It’s a much lower exposure in the E&P side and the oil field services side. From a capital markets perspective and really also a loan growth perspective, energy’s been an important part of what we do. We don’t want to undermine that.
But it’s been sort of less than 10% of our loan growth and the fee part of the business, it’s been pretty consistent over the last several years. So this is not something that’s been disproportionately part of the fee income business. Did some of the fee business in the fourth quarter that was energy related not happen? Yes, that would be accurate. And high yield markets sort of tightened up. Will some of that happen this year? Maybe. I think actually, we’re pretty well positioned. You remember, we made a small acquisition of a Company called, Lantana, which is in the advice business.
