Are recessive, deleterious alleles less common on the X chromosome than the autosomes in humans?
"Monosomy for the X chromosome in humans creates a genetic Achilles' heel for nature to deal with."

The article I quoted1 tackles this issue.  It's from the turn of the century, though, so quite old in sequencing/genetic terms, but the science is still sound as far as I can tell.  Here's the money quote:


  Hence, the X chromosome appears to have a lower gene density and should yield fewer deleterious mutations per megabase of DNA.


In short, yes, you're correct.  There appears to be less overall information on the X-chromosome, deleterious or not, and selection is faster; the X chromosome is just flat-out less diverse.  This article goes into quite a bit more but says essentially the same thing: "On one hand, the greater effectiveness of selection on males due to the hemizygous expression of the X, which may be further reinforced by sexual selection, is expected to lower the mutation load for females at shared loci."  Here is a more recent article stating the same: "This finding [X-chromosomes with lower linkage disequalibrium] is consistent with more rapid selection against deleterious mutations when the X is monosomic in males, and to a lesser extent, under random inactivation (Lyonization) in females."

Finally, here is a piece written a few years back by a colleague of mine that goes into depth on the subject.  The second half deals with population differences (also fascinating), but the first part has a lot of good detail on what you want.