Even with a single drive you still benefit from many of its advantages!

Snapshotting.

Cloning.

Transparent deduplication.

Transparent compression.

Silent corruption detection.

Self-healing (when using copies=2 or higher, obviously the only way to provide redundancy on a single-drive setup).

NFSv4 ACLs.

I run btrfs on my main arch installation. Have for ~6 months. If you get the fsck.btrfs tool (it is upstream) you eliminiate the only real showstopper with btrfs on Linux.

You get the online compression (meaning you use less space and read and write faster on mechanical storage because you have less to read / write at a time), you get the snapshots, you get subvolumes, checksums, etc.

I follow the btrfs development because I'd love to have at least the features of ZFS on Linux. However I would not dare (yet) to use it as a replacement for my current home fileserver (which owns ALL my data).

Does btrfs provide cifs export like ZFS ?

Edit:

from the btrfs wiki https://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/FAQ#Is_btrfs_stable.... :

Is btrfs stable? Short answer: No, it's still considered experimental.

Snapshots

and checksums (bit rot prevention)

I'm amazed at how generally unreliable drives are at retrieving stored data with ZFS checksums in place to highlight the problem - it seems that on average every TB of storages has a problem with a block every half-year or so.

And every 4GB of memory or so if you have ECC turned on.