There is a non-zero chance that BTC fails in some known or unknown way.

I want to be comfortable no matter what happens to BTC.

I cannot live inside my sats. Therefore it makes some sense to "invest" improving my environment (real estate for primary residence) [non-liquid asset]

I cannot use BTC as a precursor to some physical tool or product. BTC is not consumable. Therefore it may make sense to invest somewhat in commodities (metals, oil, nonperishables, etc.) [arguable liquid]

My suppliers do not accept BTC. And I do not earn in BTC. So its expensive to translate fiat income to BTC only to translate it back to fiat when I need to spend. Therefore I keep some cash and only buy sats if I think I can hodl them for 5+ years [liquid cash]

There are assets which outperform BTC and aren't ponzi schemes. Collectables, luxury products, equity in a new business that is growing rapidly (especially if the business is using BTC as its unit of account) [arguable non-liquid assets]

It would trigger taxable events if I traded assets for BTC, I'd rather borrow against those assets tax-free with low interest [liquid assets]

If I were 100% BTC, there would be some days when I would wake up and have less sats than yesterday. Its purely psychological, but I would rather wake up with more sats everyday, even if my theoretical maximum of sat stacking is less compared to living 100% in BTC.