Possibly no obvious or immediate benefit for a home user.
I think any evaluation effort is much better spent on having separate, independent backups of important data, no matter what file system is in use. Btrfs integrity guarantees, and snapshots, are not anything remotely like a substitute for backups.
But let’s take the example of space utilization. Using LVM+ext4, there are separate
/home file systems. It’s probably uncommon that home users run out of space on either. But it’s difficult to estimate. Maybe it’s somewhat common for the home user to not have a lot of storage, and maybe they share
/home with other members of the household. It’s true this issue could be avoided with “one big ext4” file system. But in the uncommon case of a clean/reinstall of Fedora, Btrfs makes it easy to do that while reusing
/home since it’s on a subvolume. Not common, but handy.
There are many uncommon scenarios that people run into that just aren’t predictable in advance. I expect there will be a Fedora community learning curve. But I also expect that more often than not, Btrfs will directly or indirectly, help avoid or make resolving the issue easier. Btrfs isn’t perfect. There are tradeoffs.
Also, note that LVM+ext4 will continue to be release blocking storage technology for the foreseeable future. It’s reasonable to have a subjective preference for the familiar, to continue on that course, and evaluate Btrfs by observation for a little while longer.
In my case, I’m using Btrfs everywhere. Laptops, the server, the Raspberry Pi, and all backups. I do trust it.