UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

SCHEDULE 14A

Proxy Statement Pursuant to Section 14(a) of the

Securities Exchange Act of 1934

(Amendment No.     )

Filed by the Registrant  ☒                             Filed by a Party other than the Registrant  ☐

Check the appropriate box:

Synaptics Incorporated

(Name of Registrant as Specified In Its Charter)

(Name of Person(s) Filing Proxy Statement, if Other Than the Registrant)

Payment of Filing Fee (Check the appropriate box):

NOTICE OF ANNUAL MEETING OF STOCKHOLDERS

October 30, 2018

The Annual Meeting of Stockholders of Synaptics Incorporated, a Delaware corporation, will be held at 9:00 a.m., Pacific time, on Tuesday, October 30, 2018, via live interactive webcast on the Internet at www.virtualshareholdermeeting.com/syna2018 for the following purposes:

1.    To elect three directors, each to serve for a three-year term expiring in 2021.

2.    To approve, on a non-binding advisory basis, the compensation of our named executive officers for fiscal 2018 (“say-on-pay”).

3.     To ratify the appointment of KPMG LLP, an independent registered public accounting firm, as the independent auditor of our company for the fiscal year ending June 29, 2019.

4.     To approve an amendment to our Amended and Restated 2010 Incentive Compensation Plan, which (i) provides for an increase of 1,700,000 shares of the Company’s common stock authorized for issuance thereunder, and (ii) expressly prohibits the payout of dividends and dividend equivalents on equity awards until the underlying award has been earned or becomes vested.

5.    To approve our Amended and Restated 2010 Employee Stock Purchase Plan, which provides for an increase of 100,000 shares of the Company’s common stock authorized for issuance thereunder.

6.    To transact such other business as may properly come before the meeting or any adjournment or postponement thereof.

The foregoing items of business are more fully described in the proxy statement accompanying this notice.

Only stockholders of record at the close of business on September 4, 2018, are entitled to notice of and to vote at the meeting or any adjournment or postponement thereof.

All stockholders are cordially invited to attend the meeting and vote their shares electronically during the meeting via the Internet. To assure your representation at the meeting, however, you are urged to vote by proxy as soon as possible over the Internet as instructed in the Notice of Internet Availability of Proxy Materials or, if you receive paper copies of the proxy materials by mail, you can also vote by telephone or by mail by following the instructions on the proxy card. You may vote your shares electronically during the virtual meeting even if you have previously returned a proxy.

		Sincerely,
San Jose, California		Richard A. Bergman
September 17, 2018		President and Chief Executive Officer

TABLE OF CONTENTS

2

.

SYNAPTICS INCORPORATED

1251 McKay Drive

San Jose, CA 95131-1709

PROXY STATEMENT

VOTING AND OTHER MATTERS

General

The accompanying proxy is solicited on behalf of Synaptics Incorporated, a Delaware corporation, by our Board of Directors for use at our Annual Meeting of Stockholders to be held on Tuesday, October 30, 2018, at 9:00 a.m., Pacific time, or at any adjournment or postponement thereof, for the purposes set forth in this proxy statement and in the accompanying meeting notice. The meeting will be held via live interactive webcast on the Internet. You will be able to attend, vote and submit your questions during the meeting at www.virtualshareholdermeeting.com/syna2018.

In accordance with rules adopted by the Securities and Exchange Commission, or the SEC, that allow companies to furnish their proxy materials over the Internet, we are mailing a Notice of Internet Availability of Proxy Materials instead of a paper copy of our proxy statement and our 2018 Annual Report to most of our stockholders. The Notice of Internet Availability of Proxy Materials contains instructions on how to access those documents and vote over the Internet. The Notice of Internet Availability of Proxy Materials also contains instructions on how to request a paper copy of our proxy materials, including our proxy statement, our 2018 Annual Report, and a form of proxy card. We believe this process will allow us to provide our stockholders with the information they need in a more timely manner, while reducing the environmental impact and lowering our costs of printing and delivering the proxy materials.

These proxy solicitation materials were first released on or about September 17, 2018, to all stockholders entitled to vote at the meeting.

Record Date and Outstanding Shares

Stockholders of record at the close of business on September 4, 2018, which we have set as the record date, are entitled to notice of and to vote at the meeting. On the record date, there were 34,881,570 outstanding shares of our common stock, par value $0.001 per share.

Quorum

The presence, via online attendance or by proxy, of the holders of a majority of the total number of shares of common stock outstanding and entitled to vote constitutes a quorum for the transaction of business at the meeting. Each stockholder voting at the meeting, either via online attendance or by proxy, may cast one vote per share of common stock held on all matters to be voted on at the meeting.

Required Votes

Assuming that a quorum is present, the affirmative vote of a majority of the votes cast is required for the election of the three director nominees for three-year terms expiring in 2021, to ratify the appointment of KPMG LLP, an independent registered public accounting firm, as the independent auditor of our company for the fiscal year ending June 29, 2019, to approve the Amended and Restated 2010 Incentive Compensation Plan, and to approve the Amended and Restated 2010 Employee Stock Purchase Plan. The advisory vote on the compensation of our named executive officers for fiscal 2018 (“say-on-pay”) is non-binding, but our Board of Directors will consider the input of stockholders based on a majority of votes cast for the say-on-pay proposal.

Our Board of Directors recommends that you vote “for” the three director nominees named herein, and in favor of each of the other proposals.

3

Voting of Proxies

When a proxy is properly executed and returned, the shares it represents will be voted at the meeting as directed. If no specification is indicated, the shares will be voted (1) “for” the election of each of the nominees for director set forth in this proxy statement, (2) “for” the advisory approval of the compensation of our named executive officers for fiscal 2018, (3) “for” the proposal to ratify the appointment of KPMG LLP, an independent registered public accounting firm, as the independent auditor of our company for the fiscal year ending June 29, 2019, (4) “for” the proposal to amend the Amended and Restated 2010 Incentive Compensation Plan, (5) “for” the approval of the Amended and Restated 2010 Employee Stock Purchase Plan, and (6) as the persons specified in the proxy deem advisable on such other matters as may come before the meeting.

Broker Non-Votes and Abstentions

Brokers, banks, or other nominees that hold shares of common stock in “street name” for a beneficial owner of those shares typically have the authority to vote in their discretion if permitted by the stock exchange or other organization of which they are members. Brokers, banks, and other nominees are permitted to vote the beneficial owner’s proxy in their own discretion as to certain “routine” proposals, such as the ratification of the appointment of KPMG LLP as the independent auditor of our company for the fiscal year ending June 29, 2019, when they have not received instructions from the beneficial owner. If a broker, bank, or other nominee votes such “uninstructed” shares for or against a “routine” proposal, those shares will be counted towards determining whether or not a quorum is present and are considered entitled to vote on the “routine” proposals. However, when a proposal is “non-routine,” a broker, bank, or other nominee is not permitted to exercise its voting discretion on that proposal without specific instructions from the beneficial owner. These non-voted shares are referred to as “broker non-votes” when the nominee has voted on other non-routine matters with authorization or voted on routine matters. These shares will be counted towards determining whether or not a quorum is present, but will not be counted for purposes of determining the votes received on the “non-routine” proposals.

Please note that brokers, banks, or other nominees may not use discretionary authority to vote shares on the election of directors, the say-on-pay, the approval of the Amended and Restated 2010 Incentive Compensation Plan, or the approval of the Amended and Restated 2010 Employee Stock Purchase Plan proposals if they have not received specific instructions from their clients. For your vote to be counted in the above, you will need to communicate your voting decisions to your broker, bank, or other nominee before the date of the meeting.

As provided in our bylaws, a majority of the votes cast means that the number of votes cast “for” a proposal exceeds the number of votes cast “against” that proposal. Because abstentions and broker non-votes do not represent votes cast “for” or “against” a proposal, broker non-votes and abstentions will have no effect on the proposal to elect directors, the say-on-pay proposal, the proposal to ratify the appointment of KPMG LLP as the independent auditor of our company for the fiscal year ending June 29, 2019, the proposal to approve the Amended and Restated 2010 Incentive Compensation Plan, or the proposal to approve the Amended and Restated 2010 Employee Stock Purchase Plan, as each such proposal is determined by reference to the votes actually cast by the shares present or represented by proxy and entitled to vote.

In accordance with our policy, an incumbent candidate for director who does not receive the required votes for re-election is expected to tender their resignation to our Board of Directors. Our Board of Directors, or another duly authorized committee of our Board of Directors, will make a determination as to whether to accept or reject the tendered resignation generally within 90 days after certification of the election results of the stockholder vote. If applicable, we will publicly disclose the decision regarding any tendered resignation and the rationale behind the decision in a filing of a Current Report on Form 8-K with the SEC.

Revocability of Proxies

Any stockholder giving a proxy may revoke the proxy at any time before its use by furnishing to us either a written notice of revocation or a duly executed proxy bearing a later date, or by attending the meeting via the Internet at www.virtualshareholdermeeting.com/syna2018 and voting electronically during the live webcast of the meeting. Attendance at the meeting will not cause your previously granted proxy to be revoked unless you specifically so request.

Election Inspector

Votes cast by proxy or by voting electronically during the live webcast of the meeting will be tabulated by the election inspector appointed for the meeting, who will determine whether a quorum is present. The election inspector will treat broker non-votes and abstentions as shares that are present and entitled to vote for purposes of determining the presence of a quorum, and as described in the “Broker Non-Votes and Abstentions” section of this proxy statement for purposes of determining the approval of any matter submitted to stockholders for a vote.

4

Solicitation

We will bear the cost of this solicitation. In addition, we may reimburse brokerage firms and other persons representing beneficial owners of shares for expenses incurred in forwarding solicitation materials to such beneficial owners. Proxies also may be solicited by certain of our directors and officers, personally or by telephone or e-mail, without additional compensation.

Annual Report and Other Matters

Our 2018 Annual Report to Stockholders, which was made available to stockholders with or preceding this proxy statement, contains financial and other information about our company, but is not incorporated into this proxy statement and is not to be considered a part of these proxy materials or subject to Regulations 14A or 14C, or to the liabilities of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or the Exchange Act. The information contained in the “Compensation Committee Report” and the “Report of the Audit Committee” shall not be deemed “filed” with the SEC or subject to Regulations 14A or 14C, or to the liabilities of Section 18 of the Exchange Act.

Through our website, www.synaptics.com, we make available free of charge all of our SEC filings, including our proxy statements, our annual reports on Form 10-K, our quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, and our current reports on Form 8-K, as well as Form 3, Form 4, and Form 5 reports of our directors, officers, and principal stockholders, together with amendments to these reports filed or furnished pursuant to Sections 13(a), 15(d), or 16 of the Exchange Act. We will also provide, upon written request, without charge to each stockholder of record as of the record date, a copy of our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2018, as filed with the SEC. Any exhibits listed in the Form 10-K report also will be furnished upon request at the actual expense we incur in furnishing such exhibits. Any such requests should be directed to our corporate secretary at our executive offices set forth in this proxy statement.

Our fiscal year is the 52- or 53-week period ending on the last Saturday in June. The fiscal periods presented in this proxy statement were the 53-week period for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2018, or fiscal 2018 and the 52-week periods for the fiscal years ended June 24, 2017, or fiscal 2017, and June 25, 2016, or fiscal 2016. Our principal executive offices are located at 1251 McKay Drive, San Jose, California 95131-1709.

5

PROPOSAL ONE: ELECTION OF DIRECTORS

Nominees

Our Certificate of Incorporation and bylaws provide that the number of directors shall be fixed from time to time by resolution of our Board of Directors. Our Board of Directors has fixed the number of directors at eight. The directors are divided into three classes, with one class standing for election each year for a three-year term. Our Board of Directors has nominated Jeffrey D. Buchanan, Keith B. Geeslin, and James L. Whims for election as class 1 directors for three-year terms expiring in 2021 or until their successors have been elected and qualified.

Unless otherwise instructed, the proxy holders will vote the proxies received by them “for” the nominees named above. Messrs. Buchanan, Geeslin and Whims are currently directors of our company. In the event that Messrs. Buchanan, Geeslin or Whims are unable or decline to serve as directors at the time of the meeting, the proxies will be voted for any nominees designated by our current Board of Directors to fill the vacancies. At this time, it is not expected that Messrs. Buchanan, Geeslin and Whims will be unable or will decline to serve as directors.

Our Board of Directors recommends a vote “for” the nominees named herein.

The following table sets forth certain information regarding our directors and the nominees for director:

Francis F. Lee has been the Chairman of the Board of Directors of our company since October 2008 and a director of our company since December 1998. Mr. Lee served as Chief Executive Officer of our company from December 1998 until July 2009 and as President of our company from December 1998 to July 2008. Mr. Lee was a consultant from August 1998 to November 1998. From May 1995 until July 1998, Mr. Lee served as General Manager of NSM, a Hong Kong-based joint venture between National Semiconductor Corporation and S. Megga. Mr. Lee held a variety of executive positions for National Semiconductor from 1988 until August 1995. These positions included Vice President of Communication and Computing Group, Vice President of Quality and Reliability, Director of Standard Logic Business Unit, and various other operations and engineering management positions. Mr. Lee is a member of the Board of Directors of Adesto Technologies, a NASDAQ Global Select Market-listed company, which develops innovative, low-power memory solutions. Mr. Lee holds a Bachelor of Science degree, with honors, in Electrical Engineering from the University of California at Davis. We believe Mr. Lee’s service for more than 10 years as our Chief Executive Officer gives him invaluable insights into our business, our culture, our personnel, our opportunities, and our challenges and provides the requisite qualifications, skills, perspectives, and experiences that make him well qualified to serve on our Board of Directors.

Richard A. Bergman has been President, Chief Executive Officer, and a director of our company since September 2011. Prior to joining our company, Mr. Bergman was Senior Vice President and General Manager of Product Group at Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. or AMD, a New York Stock Exchange-listed global semiconductor company, from May 2009 to September 2011. From October 2006 to May 2009, Mr. Bergman served as Senior Vice President and General Manager of AMD’s Graphics Product Group. Mr. Bergman’s career at AMD began in October 2006 when AMD acquired ATI Technologies, or ATI, where he served as Senior Vice President and General Manager of PC Group. Prior to ATI, Mr. Bergman served as Chief Operating Officer at S3 Graphics, a division of SonicBlue Inc. Mr. Bergman has held senior level management positions in the technology field since his early roles at Texas Instruments, Inc. and IBM. Mr. Bergman is a member of the Board of Directors, Chairman of the Compensation Committee, and a member of the Audit Committee of Maxwell Technologies, a developer and manufacturer of energy storage and power delivery solutions. Mr. Bergman holds a Bachelor of Science degree in Electrical Engineering from the University of Michigan and a Master’s degree in Business Administration from the University of Colorado. We believe Mr. Bergman’s position as Chief Executive Officer of our company, his intimate knowledge and experience with all aspects of the opportunities, operations, and challenges of our company, and his successful career at major companies before joining our company provide the requisite qualifications, skills, perspectives, and experiences that make him well qualified to serve on our Board of Directors.

6

Jeffrey D. Buchanan has been a director of our company since September 2005. Mr. Buchanan has been the Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer, and Treasurer of American Outdoor Brands Corporation, a NASDAQ Global Select Market-listed company that is a U.S.-based leader in firearm manufacturing and design, since January 2011. Mr. Buchanan became the Chief Administrative Officer of American Outdoor Brands Corporation in May 2015. Mr. Buchanan also served as Secretary of American Outdoor Brands Corporation from January 2011 until April 2012, and as a member of the Board of Directors and as the Chairman of the Audit Committee of American Outdoor Brands Corporation from November 2004 until December 2010. He was Of Counsel to the law firm of Ballard Spahr LLP from May 2010 until December 2010. Mr. Buchanan served as a Senior Managing Director of CKS Securities, LLC, a registered broker-dealer, from August 2009 until May 2010 and as a Senior Managing Director of Alare Capital Securities, L.L.C., a registered broker-dealer, from November 2006 until July 2009. From 2005 to 2006, Mr. Buchanan was principal of Echo Advisors, Inc., a corporate consulting and advisory firm focusing on mergers, acquisitions, and strategic planning. Mr. Buchanan served in various positions for Three-Five Systems, Inc., a publicly traded electronic manufacturing services company, including as Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer, and Treasurer, from May 1996 until February 2005. Mr. Buchanan was a business attorney for the law firm of O’Connor, Cavanagh, Anderson, Killingsworth & Beshears from 1986 until 1996 and for the law firm of Davis Wright Tremaine LLP from 1984 until 1986. He was a senior staff person at Deloitte & Touche LLP from 1982 to 1984. Mr. Buchanan holds a Bachelor of Science degree in Accounting from Arizona State University, a Juris Doctor degree from the University of Arizona, and a Master of Laws degree in Tax from the University of Florida. We believe Mr. Buchanan’s legal, accounting, and investment banking background, his roles as the chief financial officer and treasurer of public companies, and his public company board service provide the requisite qualifications, skills, perspectives, and experiences that make him well qualified to serve on our Board of Directors.

Nelson C. Chan has been a director of our company since February 2007. From December 2006 until August 2008, Mr. Chan served as the Chief Executive Officer of Magellan Corporation, a leader in the consumer, survey, GIS, and OEM GPS navigation and positioning markets. From 1992 through 2006, Mr. Chan served in various senior management positions with SanDisk Corporation, a global leader in flash memory cards, including most recently as Executive Vice President and General Manager, Consumer Business. From 1983 to 1992, Mr. Chan held marketing and engineering positions at Chips and Technologies, Signetics, and Delco Electronics. Mr. Chan is Chairman of the Board of Directors of Adesto Technologies, a NASDAQ Global Select Market-listed company, which develops innovative, low-power memory solutions, a member of the Board of Directors and a member of the Audit Committee of Deckers Outdoor Corporation, a footwear, apparel and accessories designer and distributor, and a member of the Board of Directors and Chair of the Compensation Committee of Socket Mobile, a company that creates data capture and delivery solutions for enhanced productivity in retail point of sale, field service, healthcare and other mobile markets. Mr. Chan was a member of the Board of Directors of Silicon Laboratories, Inc., a NASDAQ Global Select Market-listed company, which is a fabless, analog-intensive mixed-signal semiconductor company from 2007 to 2010, and a member of the Board of Directors, Chairman of the Audit Committee and member of the Compensation Committee of Affymetrix, a company which developed, manufactured and sold products and services for genetic analysis to the life science research and clinical healthcare markets from 2010 to 2016, prior to its acquisition by Thermo Fisher. Mr. Chan was also a member of the Board of Directors from July 2011 to September 2016 and Chairman of the Board of Directors from June 2013 to September 2016 of Outerwall, a NASDAQ Global Select Market-listed company, which was a provider of automated retail solutions offering services that drove incremental traffic and revenue for retailers, prior to its acquisition by Apollo Global Management, a private equity firm. Mr. Chan also currently serves on the Boards of Directors of several private companies. Mr. Chan holds a Bachelor of Science degree in Electrical and Computer Engineering from the University of California at Santa Barbara and a Master’s degree in Business Administration from Santa Clara University. We believe that Mr. Chan’s experience as the Chief Executive Officer of Magellan, his senior management positions with other leading companies, and his service as a director of multiple companies provide the requisite qualifications, skills, perspectives, and experiences that make him well qualified to serve on our Board of Directors.

Keith B. Geeslin has been a director of our company since 1986. Mr. Geeslin has been a General Partner of Francisco Partners, a firm specializing in structured investments in technology companies undergoing strategic, technological, and operational inflection points, since January 2004. From 2001 until October 2003, Mr. Geeslin served as Managing General Partner of the Sprout Group, a venture capital firm, with which he became associated in 1984. In addition, Mr. Geeslin served as a general or limited partner in a series of investment funds associated with the Sprout Group, a division of DLJ Capital Corporation, which is a subsidiary of Credit Suisse (USA), Inc. Mr. Geeslin is a member of the Board of Directors and Chairman of the Compensation Committee of CommVault Systems, Inc., a public company that provides data management software. Mr. Geeslin holds a Bachelor of Science degree in Electrical Engineering, a Master’s of Science degree in Engineering and Economic Systems from Stanford University, and a Master of Arts degree in Philosophy, Politics, and Economics from Oxford University. We believe Mr. Geeslin’s long career at leading private equity and venture capital firms with a focus on investments in high-technology companies, his service on multiple boards of directors, and his engineering background provide the requisite qualifications, skills, perspectives, and experiences that make him well qualified to serve on our Board of Directors.

Russell J. Knittel has been a director of our company since October 2010. Mr. Knittel served as Interim President and Chief Executive Officer of our company from October 2010 through September 2011, and as Executive Vice President of our company from July 2007 to October 2010. Mr. Knittel served as Chief Financial Officer, Chief Administrative Officer, Secretary, and Treasurer of our company from November 2001 through September 2009; as Senior Vice President of our company from

7

November 2001 until July 2007; and as Vice President of Administration and Finance, Chief Financial Officer, and Secretary of our company from April 2000 through October 2001. Mr. Knittel is a member of the Board of Directors and a member of the Audit Committee, the Compensation Committee, and the Corporate Governance and Nominations Committee of Quest Resource Holding Corporation, a NASDAQ Global Select Market-listed company that provides waste management and recycling services programs. Mr. Knittel served as a director of Source Photonics, a privately held company that designs, manufactures and sells optical communications and data connectivity products, from March 2012 to January 2017, a director of MarineMax, Inc., a New York Stock Exchange-listed company that is the nation’s largest recreational boat dealer, from June 2009 to February 2014, and as a director of OCZ Technology Group, Inc., a former public company, that designed, manufactured, and distributed solid-state drives and computer components, from June 2010 to August 2014. Mr. Knittel holds a Bachelor of Arts degree in Accounting from California State University at Fullerton and a Master’s degree in Business Administration from San Jose State University. We believe Mr. Knittel’s service as Interim Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of our company and his board service at other companies provide the requisite qualifications, skills, perspectives, and experiences that make him well qualified to serve on our Board of Directors.

Richard L. Sanquini has been a director of our company since 1994. Mr. Sanquini is presently a Partner at LiteCAP, a private equity firm, and has been a consultant in the semiconductor industry for more than five years. Mr. Sanquini is the former Chairman of the Board of Directors of PortalPlayer, Inc., formerly a public company that developed the silicon and operating system firmware for the Apple iPod, and was acquired by NVIDIA Corporation in January 2007. Mr. Sanquini retired from National Semiconductor in 1999 after a 20-year tenure, where he managed key business units, including microprocessors and microcontrollers, served as Chief Technology Officer, managed business development and intellectual property protection, and was Chairman of the Board of Directors for two China joint ventures. Prior to National Semiconductor, he served as President and Chief Executive Officer of Information Storage Devices and in various executive positions at RCA. Mr. Sanquini is the Chairman of the Board of Directors of Pixelworks Inc., a NASDAQ Global Select Market-listed company that designs, develops, and markets video and pixel processing semiconductors and software for digital video applications, and is on the Board of Directors of R2 Semiconductor, a power management company for consumer devices. Mr. Sanquini previously served on the Board of Directors of Validity Sensors, Inc., which we acquired in fiscal 2014, and Keyssa. Mr. Sanquini holds a Bachelor of Science degree in Electrical Engineering from the Milwaukee School of Engineering, Wisconsin. We believe that Mr. Sanquini’s long career and executive positions with numerous high-technology companies, his engineering background, his knowledge and experience in the semiconductor industry, and his service on numerous boards of directors provide the requisite qualifications, skills, perspectives, and experiences that make him well qualified to serve on our Board of Directors.

James L. Whims has been a director of our company since October 2007. Mr. Whims has been a partner at Alsop-Louie Partners, a venture capital firm focused on identifying promising entrepreneurs, since February 2010. From 1996 to 2007, Mr. Whims was a Managing Director of Techfund Capital l, LP and Techfund Capital II, LP and since 2001, a Managing Director and Venture Partner at Techfund Capital Europe, which are venture capital firms concentrating on high-technology enterprises. Mr. Whims also serves on the Board of Directors and as a member of the Compensation Committee of DigiLens . Mr. Whims was formerly a member of the Board of Directors of THQ, Inc., Portal Player, and 3DFX, all of which were NASDAQ Global Select Market-listed companies, and of Phizzle, Twitch TV and Keyssa, which were private companies. Mr. Whims was Executive Vice President of Sony Computer Entertainment of America from 1994 to 1996, where he was responsible for the North American launch of the Playstation and was the winner of the Brandweek/Ad Week marketing executive of the year. From 1990 to 1994, Mr. Whims was Executive Vice President of Software Toolworks. Mr. Whims co-founded Worlds of Wonder, an American toy company that launched Teddy Ruxpin, Lazer Tag and the United States launch of Nintendo, where he was an executive from 1985 to 1988. Mr. Whims holds a Bachelor of Science degree from Northwestern University and a Master’s degree in Business Administration from the University of Arizona. We believe Mr. Whims’ senior executive positions with major companies, his experience as an investor in high-technology companies, his service as a director of multiple companies, and his expertise in e-communications and marketing provide the requisite qualifications, skills, perspectives, and experiences that make him well qualified to serve on our Board of Directors.

Election of Nominees

The election of Messrs. Buchanan, Geeslin and Whims as class 1 directors for three-year terms expiring in 2021 or until their successors have been elected and qualified will require the affirmative vote of a majority of the votes cast, assuming that a quorum is present at the meeting.

8

CORPORATE GOVERNANCE

Director Independence

Our Board of Directors has determined, after considering all the relevant facts and circumstances, including information requested from and provided by each director concerning his background, employment and affiliation, including family relationships, that Messrs. Buchanan, Chan, Geeslin, Lee, Knittel, Sanquini, and Whims are independent directors, as “independence” is defined by the listing standards of NASDAQ and the SEC, because they have no relationship with us that would interfere with their exercise of independent judgment. Mr. Bergman is not considered an independent director of our company because of his current position as CEO of our company. There are no family relationships among any of our directors and director nominees or executive officers.

Board Committees

Our bylaws authorize our Board of Directors to appoint, from among its members, one or more committees, each consisting of one or more directors. Our Board of Directors has established three standing committees: an Audit Committee, a Compensation Committee, and a Nominations and Corporate Governance Committee. The members of our Audit Committee, Compensation Committee, and Nominations and Corporate Governance Committee consist entirely of independent directors.

The Audit Committee

The purposes of the Audit Committee include overseeing the financial and reporting processes of our company and the audits of the financial statements of our company, and providing assistance to our Board of Directors with respect to the oversight of the integrity of the financial statements of our company; our company’s compliance with legal and regulatory matters; the independent auditor’s qualifications and independence; and the performance of our company’s independent auditor. The primary responsibilities of the Audit Committee are set forth in its charter and include various matters with respect to the oversight of our company’s accounting and financial reporting processes and audits of the financial statements of our company on behalf of our Board of Directors. The Audit Committee also selects the independent auditor to conduct the annual audit of the financial statements of our company; reviews the proposed scope of such audit; reviews accounting and financial controls of our company with the independent auditor and our financial accounting staff; and reviews and approves any transactions between us and our directors, executive officers, and their affiliates.

The Audit Committee currently consists of Messrs. Buchanan, Chan, Geeslin and Knittel, each of whom is an independent director of our company under NASDAQ listing standards as well as under rules adopted by the SEC pursuant to the Sarbanes- Oxley Act of 2002, or Sarbanes-Oxley. Our Board of Directors has determined that each of Messrs. Buchanan and Knittel (whose backgrounds are detailed above) qualify as an “audit committee financial expert” in accordance with applicable rules and regulations of the SEC. Mr. Geeslin serves as the Chairman of the Audit Committee.

The Compensation Committee

The purposes of the Compensation Committee include determining, or recommending to our Board of Directors for determination, the compensation of our Chief Executive Officer and other executive officers of our company, and discharging the responsibilities of our Board of Directors relating to compensation programs of our company. The Compensation Committee currently consists of Messrs. Chan, Sanquini, and Whims, each of whom is an independent director of our company under NASDAQ listing standards as well as under rules adopted by the SEC pursuant to Sarbanes-Oxley. Mr. Chan serves as the Chairman of the Compensation Committee.

The Nominations and Corporate Governance Committee

The purposes of the Nominations and Corporate Governance Committee include selecting, or recommending to our Board of Directors for selection, individuals to stand for election as directors at the annual meeting of stockholders or, if applicable, a special meeting of stockholders, overseeing the selection and composition of the committees of our Board of Directors, and, as applicable, overseeing the management succession planning process. The Nominations and Corporate Governance Committee currently consists of Messrs. Buchanan, Sanquini, and Whims, each of whom is an independent director of our company under NASDAQ listing standards as well as under rules adopted by the SEC pursuant to Sarbanes-Oxley. Mr. Whims serves as the Chairman of the Nominations and Corporate Governance Committee.

The Nominations and Corporate Governance Committee will consider persons recommended by stockholders for inclusion as nominees for election to our Board of Directors if the information required by our bylaws is submitted in writing in a timely manner, and addressed and delivered to our corporate secretary at our executive offices set forth in this proxy statement. In addition to persons recommended by stockholders for inclusion as nominees for election to our Board of Directors, the Nominations and Corporate Governance Committee may also identify director candidates that come to its attention through incumbent directors,

9

management or third parties, and may, if it deems appropriate under the circumstances, engage a third-party search firm to assist in identifying qualified candidates. The Nominations and Corporate Governance Committee evaluates nominees for director in the same manner, regardless of whether the nominee is recommended by a stockholder or other person or entity.

In making its selection of director candidates, the Nominations and Corporate Governance Committee bears in mind that the foremost responsibility of a director is to represent the interests of our stockholders as a whole. Directors are expected to exemplify the highest standards of personal and professional integrity, and to constructively challenge management through their active participation and questioning. The Nominations and Corporate Governance Committee identifies and evaluates nominees for our Board of Directors based on these and other factors it considers appropriate, some of which may include strength of character, mature judgment, career specialization, relevant technical skills, expertise in areas relevant to the strategy and operations of our company, diversity, and the extent to which the nominee would fill a present need on our Board of Directors. The activities and associations of candidates are also reviewed for any legal impediment, conflict of interest, or other consideration that might prevent service on our Board of Directors.

Committee Charters, Corporate Governance, and Code of Ethics

Our Board of Directors has adopted charters for the Audit, Compensation, and Nominations and Corporate Governance Committees describing the authority and responsibilities delegated to each committee by our Board of Directors. Our Board of Directors has also adopted Corporate Governance Guidelines, a Code of Conduct, and a Code of Ethics for the CEO and Senior Financial Officers. We post the charters of our Audit, Compensation, and Nominations and Corporate Governance Committees; our Corporate Governance Guidelines, Code of Conduct, and Code of Ethics for the CEO and Senior Financial Officers, and any amendments or waivers thereto; and any other corporate governance materials specified by SEC or NASDAQ regulations on our website at www.synaptics.com. These documents are also available in print for any stockholder requesting a copy in writing from our corporate secretary at our executive offices set forth in this proxy statement.

Board’s Role in Risk Oversight

As is the case in virtually all businesses, we face a number of risks, including operational, economic, financial, legal, regulatory, and competitive risks. Our management is responsible for the day-to-day management of the risks we face. Our Board of Directors, as a whole and through its committees, has responsibility for the oversight of risk management.

Our Board of Directors’ involvement in our business strategy and strategic plans plays a key role in its oversight of risk management, its assessment of management’s risk appetite, and its determination of the appropriate level of enterprise risk. Our Board of Directors receives updates at least quarterly from senior management and periodically from outside advisors regarding the various risks we face. Our Board of Directors also reviews the various risks we identify in our filings with the SEC, as well as risks relating to various specific developments, such as acquisitions, stock repurchases, debt and equity placements, and product introductions.

Our Board committees assist our Board of Directors in fulfilling its oversight role in certain areas of risk. Pursuant to its charter, the Audit Committee oversees the financial and reporting processes of our company and the audit of the financial statements of our company, and provides assistance to our Board of Directors with respect to the oversight and integrity of the financial statements of our company, our company’s compliance with legal and regulatory matters, the independent auditor’s qualification and independence, and the performance of our independent auditor. The Compensation Committee considers the risks that our compensation policies and practices may have in attracting, retaining, and motivating valued employees and endeavors to assure that it is not reasonably likely that our compensation policies and practices would have a material adverse effect on our company. Our Nominations and Corporate Governance Committee oversees governance-related risks, such as director independence, conflicts of interests, and management succession planning.

Board Diversity

We seek diversity in experience, viewpoint, education, skill, and other individual qualities and attributes to be represented on our Board of Directors. We believe directors should have various qualifications, including individual character and integrity; business experience and leadership ability; strategic planning skills, ability, and experience; requisite knowledge of our industry and finance, accounting, and legal matters; communications and interpersonal skills; and the ability and willingness to devote time to our company. We also believe the skill sets, backgrounds, and qualifications of our directors, taken as a whole, should provide a significant mix of diversity in personal and professional experience, background, viewpoints, perspectives, knowledge, and abilities. Nominees are not to be discriminated against on the basis of race, religion, national origin, sex, sexual orientation, disability, or any other basis proscribed by law. The assessment of directors is made in the context of the perceived needs of our Board of Directors from time to time.

All of our directors have held high-level positions in business or professional service firms and have experience in dealing with complex issues. We believe that all of our directors are individuals of high character and integrity, are able to work well with others, and have committed to devote sufficient time to the business and affairs of our company. In addition to these attributes, the description of each director’s background set forth above indicates the specific experience, qualifications, and skills necessary to conclude that each individual should continue to serve as a director of our company.

10

Board Leadership Structure

We believe that effective board leadership structure can depend on the experience, skills, and personal interaction between persons in leadership roles as well as the needs of our company at any point in time. We currently maintain separate roles between the Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board in recognition of the differences between the two responsibilities. Our Chief Executive Officer is responsible for setting our strategic direction and for day-to-day leadership and performance of our company. Our Chairman of the Board provides input to the Chief Executive Officer, sets the agenda for Board of Directors meetings, and presides over meetings of the full Board of Directors as well as executive sessions of the Board of Directors.

We currently select, on a rotating basis, one of our independent directors to serve as Lead Director. Mr. Geeslin is currently serving as our Lead Director. In that role, Mr. Geeslin helps to facilitate communication and interaction between the Board of Directors and management.

Prohibition on Derivatives Trading and Hedging

Our Insider Trading Policy prohibits the members of our Board of Directors and employees, including our executive officers, and any family member residing in the same household from engaging in derivatives trading and hedging involving our securities without the prior approval of our Chief Financial Officer and our General Counsel.

Stock Ownership Guidelines

We maintain stock ownership guidelines that require our Chief Executive Officer to own shares of our common stock with a value equal to at least three times his annual base salary and the non-employee members of our Board of Directors to own shares of our common stock with a value equal to at least five times their annual cash retainer. These individuals had five years from fiscal 2012, when these guidelines were adopted, to achieve their required ownership levels, and each of these individuals is currently in compliance with such guidelines. We believe that these guidelines promote the alignment of the long-term interests of our Chief Executive Officer and the members of our Board of Directors with our stockholders. Further, we believe that these guidelines help mitigate the risks associated with our executive compensation program.

Compensation Committee Interlocks and Insider Participation

Our Compensation Committee consists of Messrs. Chan, Sanquini and Whims. None of these individuals was an officer or employee of the Company or had any contractual or other relationships with us during the fiscal year except as directors, and none of these individuals was formerly an officer of the Company. None of our executive officers currently serves, or in the past has served, as a member of the board of directors or as a member of the compensation committee for any entity, which has one or more of its executive officers serving on our Company’s Board of Directors or Compensation Committee.

Board and Committee Meetings

Our Board of Directors held a total of seven meetings during fiscal 2018. During fiscal 2018, the Audit Committee held five meetings; the Compensation Committee held six meetings; and the Nominations and Corporate Governance Committee held three meetings. Each of our directors attended at least 75% of the total number of meetings held in fiscal 2018 by our Board of Directors and each of the committees of our Board of Directors on which such person served during fiscal 2018.

Executive Sessions

We regularly schedule executive sessions of our Board of Directors at which non-management directors meet without the presence or participation of management. The Chairman of our Board of Directors presides at such executive sessions. We also schedule meetings of the independent directors, which are presided over by our Lead Director.

Annual Meeting Attendance

We encourage our directors to attend each Annual Meeting of Stockholders. To that end, and to the extent reasonably practicable, we generally schedule a meeting of our Board of Directors on the same day as our Annual Meeting of Stockholders. All of our directors attended our Annual Meeting of Stockholders last year.

Communications with Directors

Interested parties may communicate with our Board of Directors or specific members of our Board of Directors, including our independent directors and the members of the various committees of our Board of Directors, by submitting a letter addressed to the Board of Directors of Synaptics Incorporated, c/o any specified individual director or directors at our executive offices: 1251 McKay Drive, San Jose, California 95131-1709. Any such letters will be forwarded to the indicated directors.

11

COMPENSATION DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS

Named Executive Officers

This Compensation Discussion and Analysis provides an overview of the material components of our executive compensation program for the following executive officers:

We refer to these executive officers collectively in this Compensation Discussion and Analysis and the related compensation tables as our “Named Executive Officers” or “NEOs.”

Specifically, this Compensation Discussion and Analysis provides an overview of our executive compensation philosophy, the overall objectives of our executive compensation program, and each component of compensation that we provide. In addition, we explain how and why the Compensation Committee of our Board of Directors, or the Compensation Committee, arrived at the specific compensation policies and decisions involving our executive officers, including our Named Executive Officers, during fiscal 2018.

Executive Summary

Our executive compensation program is designed to align executive realized compensation with company performance (both financial results and stock price performance). Both cash and equity compensation for fiscal 2018 reflect the generally weak financial and stock price performance of the Company in fiscal 2018.

The following compensation practices and decisions highlight our commitment to pay for performance:

Fiscal 2018 was our sixth full fiscal year under the tenure of Mr. Bergman as our CEO. During fiscal 2018, net revenue decreased from fiscal 2017, and operating income/(loss), net income/(loss), and net income/(loss) per diluted share declined from fiscal 2017. As a result, given our emphasis on non-GAAP operating income, or operating profit, in our annual cash bonus plan, the actual cash compensation paid to our executive officers, including our Named Executive Officers, was significantly below their target total direct compensation opportunities for the year.

12

Fiscal 2018 Financial Results

Our performance for fiscal 2018 came in below expectations with revenue down from the prior fiscal year driven by a steep decline in our mobile fingerprint and discrete display driver business, partially offset by strong growth from our acquired IoT businesses. GAAP and non-GAAP operating income/(loss) for fiscal 2018 were down $126.6 million and $42.6 million from fiscal 2017, respectively, driven primarily by higher operating expenses and costs associated with the acquired IoT businesses. GAAP operating income/(loss) was further negatively impacted by incremental acquisition-related costs of $62.1 million driving lower GAAP gross margins, while non-GAAP gross margin improved year-over-year. GAAP net income/(loss) per diluted share was down $5.00 year-over-year, while non-GAAP net income per diluted share was down $0.83 year-over-year.

For fiscal 2018, we recorded the following significant financial results:

See Appendix A to this Proxy Statement for a reconciliation of GAAP to non-GAAP results.

Pay for Performance Analysis

Our compensation philosophy emphasizes performance-oriented compensation through:

The Company’s weak performance in fiscal 2018 and strong performance-based plan design resulted in significantly below-target compensation, as detailed below:

13

In the following chart, we summarize CEO target and realizable compensation. Over the last three fiscal years, realizable compensation significantly trailed target compensation levels.

As reflected in the CEO realizable pay analysis above, the equity compensation we grant to our executive officers aligns their compensation with company performance and the creation of stockholder value. In our fiscal 2018, approximately 75% of our CEO’s target total direct compensation was delivered through equity awards; as a result, realizable compensation varies meaningfully based on stock price performance.

CEO pay is also aligned with performance on a relative basis. The following tables illustrate the alignment of our CEO’s target total direct compensation (on a “realizable pay” basis) with our financial performance (based on total stockholder return, or TSR) relative to the Company’s current compensation peer group. As demonstrated by these tables, the realizable compensation of our CEO for fiscal 2018 was well aligned with our one-year and three-year TSR, as of June 29, 2018, when compared with our current compensation peer group.

The vertical axis represents the percentile ranking of our TSR and our compensation peer group’s TSR over the indicated period. The horizontal axis represents the percentile ranking of our CEO’s realizable compensation and our compensation peer group’s chief executive officers’ realizable compensation over the indicated period.

14

We have consistently set aggressive target levels for the financial performance measures used in our annual performance-based cash bonus plan. As reflected in the following table, non-GAAP operating income declined year-over-year driving a reduction in the annual bonus pool achievement to 49% for fiscal 2018. Actual bonus payment to the CEO in fiscal 2018 was further reduced to 34% based on individual performance measures.

15

Results of Most Recent Say-on-Pay Vote

At our 2017 Annual Meeting of Stockholders, we conducted our seventh stockholder advisory vote on the compensation of our Named Executive Officers (commonly referred to as a “say-on-pay” vote). Our stockholders approved the fiscal 2017 compensation of our Named Executive Officers, with approximately 92% of the votes cast in favor of our say-on-pay proposal.

Following our 2017 Annual Meeting of Stockholders, the Compensation Committee reviewed the results of the say-on-pay vote, and continued the process of re-examining the executive compensation program to ensure it is performance-based and aligns compensation levels with stockholder outcomes. The following practices illustrate the Compensation Committee and management teams’ commitment to a pay for performance philosophy:

Our Board of Directors determined that our stockholders should have the opportunity to cast an advisory vote on the compensation of our Named Executive Officers each year, consistent with the preference expressed by our stockholders at our Annual Meeting of Stockholders in October 2017.

Compensation Philosophy and Objectives

We are a leading worldwide developer and supplier of custom-designed human interface semiconductor product solutions that enable people to interact more easily and intuitively with a wide variety of mobile computing, communications, entertainment, and other electronic devices. We operate in a highly competitive business environment, which is characterized by frequent technological advances, rapidly changing market requirements, and the emergence of new market entrants. To successfully compete in this dynamic environment, we must continually develop and refine our products and services to stay ahead of customer needs and challenges. To achieve these objectives, we need a highly talented and seasoned team of engineering, sales, marketing, operations, and other business professionals.

16

We are headquartered in the Silicon Valley region of Northern California and compete with many of the premier global technology companies in attracting and retaining a skilled management team and key engineering talent. Our competitors for management and engineering talent use stock-based compensation as an important element of their overall compensation programs. To meet the challenges presented by our operating environment, we have embraced a compensation philosophy that seeks to achieve the following specific objectives:

Total compensation levels are set to reflect the role, responsibilities, and contributions of each executive officer, as well as the achievement of corporate and individual financial and operational goals. As a result of our compensation philosophy, compensation levels may vary significantly from fiscal year to fiscal year on an absolute basis and among our various executive officers.

Each year, the most important measure in assessing our corporate performance is operating profit. At the same time, the most important measure of individual performance is the achievement of each executive officer’s individual objectives that vary from year to year and position to position, but generally include financial and operating performance, product success, timely product delivery, forecasting accuracy, customer satisfaction, cost reduction, leadership, team building, and employee retention.

We expect the compensation level of our CEO will be higher than that of our other executive officers, assuming relatively equal achievement of individual performance objectives, since our compensation policies establish the framework for our executive officers’ base salaries, target annual cash bonus opportunities, and stock-based compensation after reviewing those of comparable companies, which generally compensate their chief executive officers at higher levels because of their roles and their importance to overall company success.

Compensation-Setting Process

Our Board of Directors has appointed the members of the Compensation Committee, which consists solely of independent directors. The Compensation Committee is authorized to determine and approve or make recommendations to our Board of Directors for approval with respect to, the cash compensation of our executive officers, including our Named Executive Officers, and to grant, or recommend the grant of, stock-based compensation to our executive officers, including our Named Executive Officers. The Compensation Committee currently makes compensation-related decisions regarding our executive officers.

Role of the Compensation Committee

The Compensation Committee evaluates the performance of our CEO each fiscal year and determines his compensation in light of our goals and objectives for that year. The Compensation Committee, together with our CEO, assesses the performance of our other executive officers, including our other Named Executive Officers, each year. Based in part on the recommendations of our CEO, the Compensation Committee determines the compensation of our other executive officers.

Role of the Chief Executive Officer

At the request of the Compensation Committee, our CEO typically attends a portion of each Compensation Committee meeting, including meetings at which the Compensation Committee’s compensation consultant is present. This enables the Compensation Committee to review with our CEO the corporate and individual goals and objectives that he regards as important to our overall success. The Compensation Committee also requests that our CEO assess the performance of, and our goals and objectives for, our other executive officers, including our other Named Executive Officers. Although the participation of our CEO may influence the establishment of performance target levels and individual objectives, including his own, the Compensation Committee makes all determinations regarding corporate and individual performance measures, goals, and objectives, and related target levels. Our CEO does not attend any portion of the Compensation Committee meetings at which his compensation is discussed.

17

Role of the Compensation Consultant

The Compensation Committee also retains a compensation consultant to assist in the discharge of its responsibilities, including reviewing trends in executive compensation and identifying relevant comparable companies. The Compensation Committee makes all determinations regarding the engagement, fees, and services of the compensation consultant or other advisor, and its compensation consultant or other advisor reports directly to the Compensation Committee.

During fiscal 2018, the Compensation Committee engaged Compensia, Inc. (“Compensia”), a national compensation consulting firm, to assist it in connection with its review of our fiscal 2018 executive compensation program and its analysis of the competitive market for executive talent. Compensia provided the Compensation Committee with an analysis of the compensation practices of the companies in the compensation peer group; determined our compensation positioning relative to the compensation peer group; developed market-based guidelines for the structure of our fiscal 2018 executive compensation program; reviewed the overall compensation packages; and advised the Compensation Committee regarding the propriety of our fiscal 2018 executive compensation program.

Compensia also provided advice to the Compensation Committee regarding the amendment and restatement of our 2010 Incentive Compensation Plan, which is being submitted to our stockholders for a vote as Proposal Four in this Proxy Statement. Compensia attends most Compensation Committee meetings and provides additional assistance as requested on topics including Board compensation, executive severance and change in control agreements, bonus plan design and other topics, as requested by the Compensation Committee.

The Compensation Committee has considered the independence of Compensia in light of the listing standards of NASDAQ on compensation committee independence and the rules of the SEC. The Compensation Committee requested and received confirmation from Compensia concerning certain factors for determining the independence of the firm and its senior advisors working with the Compensation Committee. The Compensation Committee discussed these considerations and concluded that the work performed by Compensia did not raise any material conflict of interest.

Use of Competitive Market Data

In determining the compensation of our executive officers, including our Named Executive Officers, the Compensation Committee considers data gathered from a self-constructed group of peer companies, and published survey data for technology companies.

During the latter stages of fiscal 2017, after consultation with Compensia, the Compensation Committee developed and approved a compensation peer group for use in its executive compensation decisions for fiscal 2018 based on the following selection criteria:

The companies included in the compensation peer group approved by the Compensation Committee were as follows:

18

The Compensation Committee strives to select peer companies such that our company falls near the median for revenue and market capitalization within the selected peer group. For fiscal 2019, based upon recommendations from Compensia, the Compensation Committee approved changes to the compensation peer group criteria to include semiconductor companies with revenue of between approximately $577 million and $5.2 billion, based upon the last four quarters of reported revenue at the time of selection, and a market capitalization of greater than $433 million. As a result of the new criteria, including acquisition and merger activity impacting the companies in the compensation peer group, the Compensation Committee removed Analog Devices, Cavium, Microchip Technology, Skyworks Solutions and Xilinx, and added Inphi, Knowles, MACOM Technology Solutions, and Mellanox Technologies to the compensation peer group for fiscal 2019.

Compensation Elements

Our executive compensation program consists primarily of three elements: base salary, annual performance-based cash bonuses, and long-term incentive, or LTI, compensation in the form of stock-based awards. Our executive officers also participate in several company-wide benefit plans, including retirement and health and welfare benefit plans, which generally are available to all regular full-time employees.

Base Salary

We seek to pay base salaries at competitive levels that enable us to attract, motivate, and retain highly qualified executive officers. Base salaries for our executive officers, including our Named Executive Officers, reflect each individual’s position, responsibilities, experience, skills, performance, and ongoing and expected future contributions. In determining base salary, the Compensation Committee also takes into account salary levels for similar positions at the companies in the compensation peer group and base salary levels relative to other positions within our company. Consistent with our compensation philosophy, we set the base salaries of our executive officers at levels that are less than the market median to reinforce our desire that our annual performance-based cash bonuses and LTI compensation, which are based on our financial performance and our executive officers’ achievement of individual performance objectives as set from time to time, represent a significant portion of the executive officers’ target compensation each year.

The Compensation Committee determines the annual base salary of our CEO in its sole discretion. The base salaries of our other executive officers, including our other Named Executive Officers, are determined by the Compensation Committee after considering the recommendations of our CEO as well as the factors described above.

As has been its practice, for fiscal 2018, the Compensation Committee set the base salaries for our executive officers, including our Named Executive Officers, at the beginning of the fiscal year. Base salary adjustments were not made for our CEO, CFO or Senior Vice President of Worldwide Operations for fiscal 2018 based on the Compensation Committee’s review of company performance and its assessment of the competitive market. The annual base salaries for our Named Executive Officers during fiscal 2018 were as follows:

In June 2016, our Named Executive Officers requested a voluntary and temporary base salary reduction effective only for fiscal 2017 of 20% for Mr. Bergman and 10% for our other Named Executive Officers. The salary reductions were reviewed and approved by the Compensation Committee.

19

Annual Performance-Based Cash Bonuses

We use annual performance-based cash bonuses to motivate our executive officers, including our Named Executive Officers, to achieve our annual financial and operational objectives as set forth in our annual operating plan, while making progress towards and supporting our longer-term strategic and growth goals. The payment of these bonuses is based upon the achievement of one or more corporate performance objectives, which typically include meeting a specified target level of operating profit and individual performance goals.

At the beginning of each fiscal year, our Board of Directors approves our annual operating plan, which forms the basis for the corporate performance measures and individual performance goals for our annual performance-based cash bonuses. Further, the Compensation Committee reviews and sets the framework for the annual performance-based cash bonuses for the fiscal year, including confirming the plan participants, establishing a target annual cash bonus opportunity for each participating executive officer, and reviewing the corporate performance measures and individual performance goals for the fiscal year.

Target Bonus Opportunities

As in prior years, the Compensation Committee determined that the target annual cash bonus opportunities for each of our Named Executive Officers for fiscal 2018 should be based on a percentage of such Named Executive Officer’s base salary. The target annual cash bonus opportunity established for each Named Executive Officer for fiscal 2018, which was maintained at its fiscal 2017 level, was as follows:

In setting these target annual cash bonus opportunities for our Named Executive Officers, the Compensation Committee exercised its judgment and considered several factors, including our overall financial and operational results for the prior fiscal year, the prior performance of each individual Named Executive Officer, the Named Executive Officer’s potential to contribute to our long-term strategic success, the Named Executive Officer’s role and responsibilities, the Named Executive Officer’s individual experience and skills, market practices for annual bonuses, and, for our other Named Executive Officers, the recommendations of our CEO.

Corporate Performance Measures

For fiscal 2018, our Board of Directors selected non-GAAP operating profit as the primary corporate performance measure, representing 75% of the target annual cash bonus opportunity, together with selected strategic and individual performance goals, representing the remaining 25% of the target annual cash bonus opportunity, as the criterion that best supported our annual operating plan and enhanced long-term value creation for purposes of funding our bonus pool. As determined by the Compensation Committee, our executive officers, including our Named Executive Officers, were eligible to earn bonus payments based on our actual performance against the non-GAAP operating profit target set forth in our fiscal 2018 annual operating plan. Fiscal 2018 non-GAAP operating profit was determined by adjusting GAAP operating profit for acquisition and integration related costs, which includes amortization of purchased intangible assets and inventory fair value adjustments associated with acquisitions; share-based compensation costs; restructuring costs; and arbitration costs (for more information on how non-GAAP operating profit is calculated, see Appendix A of this Proxy Statement).

For fiscal 2018, the target level for the non-GAAP operating profit performance measure was $194 million and we achieved $162 million. The operating profit achievement and assessment of strategic goal attainment resulted in a bonus pool funded at approximately 49% for our fiscal 2018. Our Board of Directors set this target level to be aggressive, yet achievable, with diligent effort during the fiscal year.

20

Individual Performance Objectives

Consistent with our compensation philosophy of rewarding individual performance, our CEO developed and recommended to the Compensation Committee a series of individual performance goals for our executive officers, including our other Named Executive Officers, which he deemed to be integral to the achievement of our annual operating plan. These objectives were approved by the Compensation Committee. The Compensation Committee determined the individual performance goals that should be used to assess the performance of our CEO.

For purposes of the fiscal 2018 annual performance-based cash bonuses, the individual performance goals for each of our Named Executive Officers were as follows:

After the end of the fiscal year, our CEO evaluated each executive officer’s progress towards the achievement of their individual performance objectives. In the case of our CEO, the Compensation Committee evaluated his progress towards the achievement of his individual performance goals.

Fiscal 2018 Bonus Decisions

For fiscal 2018, annual performance-based cash bonus payments were determined after the end of the fiscal year by the Compensation Committee. The Compensation Committee’s determination of annual performance-based cash bonuses involved a multi-step process. First, the Compensation Committee established the annual target cash bonus pool for fiscal 2018 based on the aggregate target annual cash bonus opportunities for all of our employees, including our executive officers. The portion of the bonus pool that was subject to the actual level of achievement of the pre-established non-GAAP operating profit target level for the fiscal year was adjusted based on our performance relative to the non-GAAP operating profit target level as approved by our Board of Directors at the beginning of the year. Second, the portion of the bonus pool that was subject to the actual level of achievement of the pre-established strategic goals for the fiscal year, was adjusted based on our performance relative to the pre-established strategic goals as approved by our Board of Directors at the beginning of the year.

The Compensation Committee then determined the cash bonus payment, if any, to be received from the available bonus pool by an executive officer by evaluating the executive officer’s position and responsibility level within our company, as well as performing a subjective assessment of each executive officer’s actual performance as measured against each executive officer’s individual performance objectives (in the case of our other Named Executive Officers, after considering the recommendations of our CEO). Further, the Compensation Committee exercised discretion in determining each executive officer’s bonus payment based upon the size of the available pool.

21

Based on this criteria, the following bonus payments were made to our Named Executive Officers for fiscal 2018:

For fiscal 2018 as a whole, our employees achieved an average payout level of approximately 49% of their target bonuses, while our Named Executive Officers achieved a payout level of approximately 43% of their target bonuses as a result of not achieving the target level for the non-GAAP operating profit performance measure and exceeding the target level for the selected strategic goals measure. The portion of the bonus pool established by the Compensation Committee for our Named Executive Officers represented approximately 0.5% of our fiscal 2018 non-GAAP operating profit.

Long-Term Incentive Compensation

As a technology company that encounters significant competition for qualified personnel, long-term incentive, or LTI, compensation plays a critical role in our ability to attract, hire, motivate, and retain qualified and experienced executive officers. The use of equity compensation is necessary for us to compete for qualified executive officers without significantly increasing cash compensation and is the most important component of our executive compensation program. We use LTI compensation in the form of equity awards to motivate our executive officers, including our Named Executive Officers, for long-term corporate performance based on the value of our common stock and thereby, further align their interests with those of our stockholders. Our LTI compensation consists of stock options, performance-based MSU and PSU awards, and time-based DSU awards, the purposes for which are described below:

22

Fiscal 2018 Long-Term Incentive Compensation Decisions

For new grants approved in fiscal 2018, we granted NEO equity compensation in a target value mix of 33% DSUs, 33% PSUs and 33% MSUs. The Compensation Committee determined that an LTI award consisting of a combination of DSU awards, PSU awards and MSU awards would provide our executive officers with a competitive equity compensation package, while further aligning their compensation with our long-term business and financial objectives and promoting the creation of stockholder value. The final tranche of stock option grants approved by our Compensation Committee in fiscal 2017 was granted to our NEOs in August 2017.

For fiscal 2018, the fair value of the equity awards granted to our NEOs as part of our annual “refresh” program were, on average, 5% in the form of a stock option award, approximately 29% in the form of a DSU award, 29% in the form of a PSU award and 37% in the form of an MSU award. The actual grant date fair values of the awards granted to our NEOs varies from the target mix due to the accounting valuation methodology for MSUs.

The equity awards granted to our Named Executive Officers in fiscal 2018 were as follows.

The size of these LTI compensation awards were determined by the Compensation Committee based on its assessment of our financial results for fiscal 2017, its evaluation of each executive officer’s performance during fiscal 2017, and the following additional factors: each executive officer’s position within our company; an assessment of the equity award practices of the companies in our compensation peer group; and an assessment of the outstanding equity awards then-held by each executive officer. In making its award decisions, the Compensation Committee exercised its judgment to set the size of each award at a level it considered appropriate to create a meaningful opportunity for reward predicated on the creation of long-term stockholder value.

DSU Awards and Stock Options

Once the size of the LTI compensation awards for our Named Executive Officers were determined, the Compensation Committee decided that the portion of the award to be delivered in the form of DSU awards would vest as follows: for current executives, DSUs generally vest over three years, with 1/3rd of the total number of shares of our common stock subject to the DSU award vesting annually in the quarter the award was granted until fully vested; for newly hired executives, DSUs generally vest over four years, with 1/4th of the total number of shares of our common stock subject to the DSU award vesting annually in the quarter the award was granted until fully vested.

Beginning in fiscal 2018, our Named Executive Officers no longer receive stock options as part of their equity compensation. For stock option awards approved in fiscal 2017, the stock option awards were granted quarterly in four equal installments beginning in October 2016, which is in the second quarter of our fiscal 2017, through the first quarter of fiscal 2018, with an exercise price equal to the fair market value of our common stock on each grant date.

23

PSU Awards

As established by the Compensation Committee, each PSU award consists of the right to receive a specified number of shares of our common stock if the award’s performance conditions are satisfied.

The PSUs granted to our executive officers are designed to vest in three tranches with the target quantity for each tranche equal to one-third of the total PSU grant. The grants have a specific one-year performance period and vesting occurs over three service periods with the final service period ending approximately three years from the grant date. Performance is measured based on the achievement of a specified level of non-GAAP earnings per share. The potential payout ranges from 0% to 200% of the target number of shares subject to the award for each tranche and is adjusted on a linear basis with a payout triggering if our non- GAAP earnings per share equals greater than 65% of the target with a maximum payout achieved at 135% of target. PSUs granted in fiscal 2018 to our executive officers are based on our performance in calendar year 2018.

Delivery of shares earned, if any, will take place on the dates provided in the applicable PSU grant agreement, assuming the grantee is still an employee of our company at the end of the applicable service period. On the delivery date, we withhold shares to cover statutory tax withholding requirements and deliver a net quantity of shares to the executive officer after such withholding. Until delivery of shares, the grantee has no rights as a stockholder with respect to any shares underlying the PSU award.

In limited circumstances, including in the event of a change of control of our company and termination of employment of an executive officer, acceleration of vesting may occur; such acceleration, if any, will occur pursuant to the equity agreement underlying such equity and any then-in-effect Change of Control policy covering such executive officer.

MSU Awards

As established by the Compensation Committee, each MSU award granted to our executive officers consists of the right to receive a specified number of shares of our common stock if the award’s performance conditions are satisfied. The shares of our common stock subject to such MSU awards will be earned, if at all, based on our total stockholder return, or TSR, compared to that of the S&P Semiconductor Select Industry Index, or SPSISC Index TSR, for awards granted to our executive officers beginning in fiscal 2018, and compared to that of the Philadelphia Semiconductor Index TSR, or the SOX Index TSR, for awards granted to our executive officers prior to fiscal 2018, over a one-year, a two-year, and a three-year performance period. In other words, the actual number of shares of our common stock that may be earned under the MSU awards will vary based on over- or under-performance of our TSR compared to that of the SPSISC Index TSR or SOX Index TSR, as applicable, over the specified performance periods. Pursuant to the terms of the fiscal 2018 MSU awards granted on October 30, 2017:

Any shares of our common stock earned under an MSU award will vest and be delivered to an executive officer within 30 days of the end of the one-year, two-year, and three-year performance periods. In limited circumstances, including in the event of a change of control of our company and termination of employment of an executive officer, an acceleration of vesting may occur; such acceleration, if any, will occur pursuant to the equity agreement underlying such equity and any then-in-effect Change of Control policy covering such executive officer.

24

As of our record date, the outstanding MSU awards held by our NEOs are currently tracking to pay out against their target as follows:

Stock Ownership Guidelines and Hedging Prohibition

We maintain stock ownership guidelines that require our CEO to own shares of our common stock with a value equal to at least three times his annual base salary. Our CEO had five years from fiscal 2012 to achieve this required ownership level and currently has met this ownership guideline. We believe that these guidelines further promote the alignment of the long-term interests of our CEO with our stockholders. We also believe that these guidelines help mitigate the risks associated with our executive compensation program. In addition, our Insider Trading Policy prohibits our executive officers, and any family member residing in the same household, from engaging in derivatives trading and hedging involving our securities without the prior approval of our Chief Financial Officer and our General Counsel.

Equity Award Grant Policy

Our Board of Directors or the Compensation Committee, as applicable, approves equity awards at its regularly scheduled meetings each year. Generally, in the case of equity awards granted to newly hired executive officers, we set the price of such awards at the closing market price of our common stock as reported on the NASDAQ Global Select Market on the date such grant is approved by our Board of Directors, the Compensation Committee or their delegate. Generally, in the case of a DSU award granted to our existing executive officers, we provide for effective dates on the first business day after the applicable quarterly financial earnings release. In the case of a stock option granted to our existing executive officers, the exercise price of such awards is equal to the fair market value of our common stock as reported on the NASDAQ Global Select Market on each grant date, which is generally the first business day after the applicable quarterly financial earnings release. In the case of MSU and PSU awards granted to our existing executive officers, we provide for an effective date at the October Compensation Committee meeting. For more information on our MSU and PSU awards, refer to the “Long-Term Incentive Compensation” section in this Compensation Discussion and Analysis.

Employment Arrangements

While we do not have employment agreements with any of our executive officers, the initial terms and conditions of employment for each of our Named Executive Officers have been set forth in a written employment offer letter. Each of these arrangements was approved on our behalf by the Compensation Committee or, in certain instances, by our Board of Directors.

In filling our executive positions, our Board of Directors or the Compensation Committee, as applicable, recognized that it would need to develop competitive compensation packages to attract qualified candidates in a dynamic labor market. At the same time, our Board of Directors and the Compensation Committee were sensitive to the need to integrate new executive officers into the executive compensation structure that we were seeking to develop, balancing both competitive and internal equity considerations.

Each of these employment offer letters provides for “at will” employment and sets forth the initial compensation arrangements for the executive officer, including an initial base salary, an annual performance-based cash bonus opportunity, and a stock-based compensation award in the form of an option to purchase shares of our common stock and DSU awards, that was submitted to our Compensation Committee for approval.

Perquisites and Other Personal Benefits

We do not view perquisites or other personal benefits as a significant component of our executive compensation program. From time to time, we may provide perquisites or other personal benefits in limited circumstances, such as when we believe it is appropriate to assist an individual executive officer in the performance of the executive officer’s duties, to make our executive officers more efficient and effective, and for recruitment, motivation, or retention purposes. All future practices with respect to perquisites or other personal benefits will be approved and subject to periodic review by the Compensation Committee.

Nonqualified Deferred Compensation

We do not provide any nonqualified deferred compensation for any of our employees.

25

Retirement and Other Benefits

We have established a Section 401(k) retirement savings plan for our executive officers, including our Named Executive Officers, on the same basis as for all of our other employees who satisfy certain eligibility requirements. Under this plan, participants may elect to make pre-tax contributions of up to 30% of their current compensation, not to exceed the applicable statutory income tax limitation. Currently, we match 25% of the contributions made by participants in the plan, up to a maximum of $4,500 per participant on a calendar year basis. We intend for the plan to qualify under Section 401(a) of the Internal Revenue Code, or the Code, so that contributions by participants or by us to the plan, and income earned on plan contributions, are not taxable to participants until withdrawn from the plan.

Additional benefits received by our executive officers, including our Named Executive Officers, include medical, dental, vision, life, and disability insurance benefits and participation in our employee stock purchase plan. These benefits are provided to our executive officers on the same basis as to all of our regular full-time employees.

Severance Policy

In October 2011, our Board of Directors adopted the amended Severance Policy for Principal Executive Officers, or the Severance Policy, which was further amended and approved by the Compensation Committee on October 30, 2017, and which applies to certain executive officers designated by our Board of Directors. All of our Named Executive Officers are covered by the Severance Policy. Under the Severance Policy, we will pay (i) 100% of the base salary in the case of our CEO over a period of one year and 50% of the base salary in the case of our other designated executive officers over a period of six months; (ii) 100% of the target bonus in the case of our CEO, the greater of 50% of the target bonus or a pro rata amount of the target bonus in the case of our CFO, and a pro rata amount of the target bonus in the case of our other designated executive officers, in each case for the fiscal year during which such termination occurs, and (iii) pay the COBRA premium for coverage under our medical plan for the designated executive officer and the executive officer’s dependents following a termination of employment by us without “good cause” or by the executive officer for “good reason,” each as defined in the Severance Policy, for one year in the case of our CEO and six months in the case of our other designated executive officers. All outstanding and unvested stock options and DSU awards held by our CEO or our other designated executive officers will cease to vest on such executive officer’s date of employment termination, and such executive officer’s outstanding and vested stock option awards will be exercisable for 90 days after such executive officer’s date of employment termination, but not beyond their original term. The Severance Policy will terminate upon a “change of control” of our company as defined in the Severance Policy.

Change of Control Severance Policy

In July 2014, we enacted a Change of Control Severance Policy for Principal Executive Officers, or the CoC Severance Policy, which was further amended and approved by the Compensation Committee on October 30, 2017. The CoC Severance Policy applies to certain executive officers who have been designated by our Board of Directors. All of our Named Executive Officers are covered by the CoC Severance Policy. The CoC Severance Policy replaced individual Change of Control Severance Agreements entered into with our CEO and several of our executive officers. The CoC Severance Policy was designed by the Compensation Committee to meet current market expectations and was modeled after the practices of the companies in our then-current compensation peer group. The CoC Severance Policy provides for specified payments and benefits only upon a qualifying termination of employment following a “change of control” of our company as defined in the policy (a “double trigger” arrangement), meaning that both a change of control of our company and a termination of employment must occur before the designated executive officer is eligible to receive any payments or benefits.

The CoC Severance Policy provides that, in the event of a termination of employment by our company without “good cause” or by the designated executive officer with “good reason,” each as defined in the policy, within three months prior to a change of control or 18 months following a change of control of our company, such designated executive officer will be eligible to receive the following:

The foregoing payments and benefits are contingent upon the designated executive officer executing and not revoking a release of all claims that he or she may have against us.

26

The CoC Severance Policy also provides that, in the event of a change of control of our company, all outstanding and unvested stock options and DSU awards (but not including any outstanding MSU awards) will immediately vest in full if the employment of the designated executive officer is terminated by our company without “good cause” or by the designated executive officer with “good reason,” each as defined in the policy. Such stock options will be exercisable for 90 days after such executive officer’s date of employment termination, but not beyond their original term.

All outstanding and unearned MSU and PSU awards will continue to be earned in accordance with the terms of the MSU or PSU grant agreement.

We implemented the CoC Severance Policy to mitigate a potential disincentive for these executive officers when they are evaluating a potential acquisition of our company, particularly when their services may not be required by the acquiring entity. The CoC Severance Policy has been designed to provide each of our executive officers, including the Named Executive Officers, with consistent treatment and to avoid the inadvertent incurrence of an excise tax under Section 409A of the Code.

Except as described herein or under “Potential Payments Upon Termination or Change of Control” below, we do not offer our executive officers, including our Named Executive Officers, any other severance payments or benefits upon their termination of employment with our company, whether or not in connection with a change of control of our company.

Tax and Accounting Considerations

Deductibility of Executive Compensation

We take into account the tax effects of executive compensation on us and our executive officers. Section 162(m) of the Code (“Section 162(m)”) limits the deductibility, for federal income tax purposes, of remuneration in excess of $1 million paid to certain executives of any publicly held corporation in any taxable year. Thus, we are able to deduct certain types of remuneration paid to any of these individuals only to the extent that such remuneration during any taxable year does not exceed $1 million. Historically, remuneration in excess of $1 million could be deducted if it qualified as “performance-based compensation” within the meaning of Section 162(m) or satisfied the condition of another exemption from the deductibility limit. This performance-based exception has been repealed, effective for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2017. However, certain arrangements in place as of November 2, 2017 may be eligible for transition relief under the Code. Our Amended and Restated 2010 Incentive Compensation Plan (as more fully described in Proposal 4) retains certain legacy provisions that were originally included in the plan so that outstanding awards that may qualify for transition relief under the Code are not impacted.

While the Compensation Committee is mindful of the benefit of being able to fully deduct the compensation paid to our Named Executive Officers, it believes that we should retain the flexibility to provide compensation to our Named Executive Officers that is not fully tax deductible when it believes that such payments are appropriate to attract and retain executive talent or meet other business objectives. Thus, the Compensation Committee may, in its judgment, authorize compensation payments that are not deductible by reason of the application of 162(m) when it believes that such payments are appropriate to attract and retain executive talent, and is in our best interests and the best interests of our stockholders.

Taxation of “Parachute” Payments

Sections 280G and 4999 of the Code provide that executive officers and directors, who hold significant equity interests, and certain other service providers may be subject to significant additional taxes if they receive payments or benefits that exceed certain prescribed limits in connection with a change of control of a company, and that the company (or a successor) may forfeit a deduction on the amounts subject to this additional tax. We did not provide any executive officer, including any Named Executive Officer, with a “gross-up” or other reimbursement payment for any tax liability that he or she might owe as a result of the application of Sections 280G and 4999 of the Code during fiscal 2018, and we have not agreed and are not otherwise obligated to provide any executive officer with such a “gross-up” or other reimbursement.

Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation

We account for stock-based compensation arrangements in accordance with the provisions of Financial Accounting Standards Board Accounting Standards Codification Topic 718 “Compensation – Stock Compensation,” or ASC Topic 718. ASC Topic 718 requires companies to measure the compensation expense for all stock-based payment awards made to employees and directors, including stock options, PSU, DSU and MSU awards, based on the grant date “fair value” of these awards. This calculation is performed for accounting purposes and reported in the compensation tables below, even though our Named Executive Officers may never realize any value from their awards. ASC Topic 718 also requires companies to recognize the compensation cost of their stock-based compensation awards in their income statements over the period that an employee or director is required to render service in exchange for the stock option or other award. In determining stock-based compensation, the Compensation Committee considers the potential expense of these awards under ASC Topic 718 and other accounting implications such awards may have on us.

27

Compensation Recovery Policy

On October 12, 2016, our Board of Directors approved an amendment and restatement of the Company’s 2010 Incentive Compensation Plan, which now contains a clawback provision that applies to all awards held by the Company’s executive officers (as defined by the Securities Exchange Act of 1934). All awards (cash and equity) held by an executive officer will be subject to clawback, recoupment or forfeiture, (i) to the extent that such executive officer is determined to have engaged in fraud or intentional illegal conduct that caused the Company’s material non-compliance with any applicable financial reporting requirements and resulted in a financial restatement, the result of which is that the amount received from such award would have been lower had it been calculated on the basis of such restated results, or (ii) as required by applicable laws, rules, regulations or listing requirements. Such clawback, recoupment or forfeiture, in addition to any other remedies available under applicable law, will occur through the cancellation of the excess awards and the recoupment of any gains realized with respect to the excess awards. The executive officers may not claim the operation of the clawback as the basis for “good reason” to resign and receive severance benefits.

COMPENSATION COMMITTEE REPORT

The Compensation Committee has reviewed and discussed with management the “Compensation Discussion and Analysis” included in this Proxy Statement and, based on such review and discussion, the Compensation Committee recommended to our Board of Directors that the “Compensation Discussion and Analysis” be included in this Proxy Statement.

28

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

Fiscal 2018 Summary Compensation Table

The following table sets forth information regarding compensation for services in all capacities to us and our subsidiaries received by our Named Executive Officers for the fiscal years 2018, 2017, and 2016.

29

30

Fiscal 2018 Grants of Plan-Based Awards Table

The following table sets forth certain information with respect to grants of plan-based awards to our Named Executive Officers for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2018.

31

32

Fiscal 2018 Outstanding Equity Awards at Fiscal Year-End Table

The following table sets forth information with respect to outstanding equity-based awards held by our Named Executive Officers as of June 30, 2018.