I am aware of the influence of decisive British victories such as the Battles of The Nile and Trafalgar; my question is more concerned with underlying forces that may have been at play, for example:
A brief search did not reveal any similar questions, my apologies if I have violated any rules!
The answer to this question is foremost that the French couldn't focus on naval in the same way that the British could. It's a strategic problem that would vex Imperial Germany during World War One as well.
In both cases, you have a terrestrial power with significant commitments tying them into maintaining a very large, strong army. In Napoleon's case, he needed an army large enough to fight either Prussia, Russia, Austria, or sometimes several at one time, while also securing his gains in Italy, Germany, and later Spain.
For these reasons, Napoleonic France was rarely able to devote the resources or attention towards overcoming the Royal Navy, which is Britain's 'senior service' and the cornerstone of British security. From Britain's standpoint, they had relatively few obligations for a large army, so they generally kept a smaller, more well honed force compared to Napoleon's Grand Armee.
Other people can provide more depth on tactics, training, ship designs, etc. but I think those are just micro, details compared to the macro aspects I outlined.