ZD, I would say that your generalities are characteristics that apply to a majority, but not necessarily a definition. For example, the lvush- chasidim have very different lvush than litvish chareidim, and Israeli daati Leumi dress very differently than American Modern Orthodox, so I don’t think that the Lvush itself can be used as a definition, although for sure it is true that Lvush is different.
I might be repeating what came before, but here is my take:
Chareidi is a term used in Israel, where the categories were chiloni, daati leumi and chareidi. The differences between the groups were obvious. Chareidism wasn’t a movement, but applied to the old yishuv as well as other frum people who came to the country later on who did not identify with the tzioni/daati leumi society.
In America, at first there was just frum and not-frum. To be more precise, the frum could be divided generally into modern orthodox , chasidish, yeshivish (maybe also baale batish – for those families where the father was not learning long-term in yeshiva but did not fit the other categories). Growing up I never heard the word Chareidi. Now it has been imported from Israel and I think is used instead of yeshivish and chasidish.
I don’t think chareidism is a movement anymore than Orthodoxy is. Just a term that became necessary when other types emerged.